Español
Louis C. Sierra - 
To close this topic, some commentary about this rule, I think must be changed:
Why the alternate-possession rule must be changed ?
• An inspired defensive effort by a trailing team should not be undone because it's the other team's turn to take possession.
• An official's inability to consistently make a fair toss should not alter the rules of the game.
• The rule really penalizes a great defensive effort. You can make a great defensive play but late in the game Team B forces a jump ball, an alternate possession goes to Team A who scores the goal in the last second to win the game.
• When they try to make the game too fair, they take away the whole reason for competing. It shouldn't be a 'fair' factor. It should be whomever is aggressive enough to get his hands on the ball. That's the unknown about any sport. That's what makes the sport interesting.
Why changing the alternate-possession rule would not be efficient ?
• For the same reason it was established the potential for a toss that gives one team an unfair advantage over the other.
• A late-game jump ball, in an intense sequence, increases the possibility of injury to officials.
• At least some advantage is gained from tying up the ball, even if it is only reversing the possession arrow.
• The alternative is worse. In many instances, one or the other team has a dominant big man who almost always controls the tip.
Brian Denver - eBA Stats Team - Basketball Statistics Analysis
• For the same reason it was established the potential for a toss that gives one team an unfair advantage over the other.
• A late-game jump ball, in an intense sequence, increases the possibility of injury to officials.
• At least some advantage is gained from tying up the ball, even if it is only reversing the possession arrow.
• The alternative is worse. In many instances, one or the other team has a dominant big man who almost always controls the tip.
Brian Denver - eBA Stats Team - Basketball Statistics Analysis