Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac
9.12 SITUATION B: On the second of two free-throw attempts by A1, the ball is touched outside the cylinder by A2. RULING: No points can be scored. A2’s actions are ruled a violation. B will be given the ball for a throw-in from the designated out of bounds spot nearest the violation. (9-1 Penalty 1)[/I]
Is this yet another poor editing job by the NFHS?
|
Here's how the caseplay read back in the
2016-17 NFHS Casebook:
9.12 SITUATION B: On the second of two free-throw attempts by A1, the ball is touched outside the cylinder by A2. RULING: No points can be scored. A2’s actions are ruled a violation. B will be given the ball for a throw-in on the sideline at the free-throw line extended. (9-1 Penalty 1)
Wow!
The throwin spot (on the sideline at the free-throw line extended) is from ancient times, way, way back before 2016-17, back when in all cases where the ball enters the basket illegally due to basket interference or goaltending (field goal or free throw), after an offensive free throw violation, or after a player control foul (charge), the ball was given to the offended team on the sideline at the free-throw line extended, as a "signal" to the the scorekeeper that the basket didn't count.
I think that it was put in play on the lead's sideline in the "Cadillac postilion" (to the right side of the free thrower).
Am I right Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.?
Why is the NFHS struggling so much with caseplay 9.12 SITUATION B?
Stupid NFHS.