Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac
Agree on intentional foul.
However there are existing rules in place to award free throws in this situation. Remember a free thrower is not a "player trying for a field goal". By rule, a free thrower fouled is the same as a ball handler being hand checked; a common foul with penalties listed.
It's the rule, but doesn't seem "right", and provides yet another reason to go with an intentional foul.
A further extrapolation of this interpretation would be helpful (what happens next?): 2015-2016 NFHS Interpretations Situation 2: After A1 releases the ball on a free throw try, B1 steps into the lane and backs across the free-throw line to box out the free-throw shooter then makes contact with the free-throw shooter. The free throw is missed. Ruling: The official should rule a delayed violation on the opponent. A1 will be awarded a substitute free throw and the contact is ruled a foul. The substitute free throw would be administered with the free-throw lane spaces unoccupied. (9-1-2g Penalty 2b)
It's a foul. Doesn't tell us what type.
Lane spaces unoccupied. So Team A will either get free throw(s), and/or the ball back for a throwin.
Questions left unanswered.
|
Disagree with your interpretation (in bold). A free thrower fouled in the act of shooting is not the same as a dribbler being fouled with a hand check. A free thrower NO LONGER in the act of shooting (ball released as in Situation 2 above) would be the same as a dribbler being hand checked with the same penalty regarding bonus free throws or not following the free throw. Think about dead ball. If a foul is called for hand checking (common foul), when does the ball become dead? If a FT shooter is fouled in the act of shooting, when does the ball become dead? By rule continuous motion is what applies and equates a free throw with a try or tap for a field goal. A foul on a free thrower in the act of shooting cannot be penalized like a common foul. As officials, we have to make that logical distinction even though the rule book may not specifically make if for us considering the absurdity of it ever happening. Even so, the possibility exists of a free thrower being fouled in the act of shooting and the only penalty being the ball awarded out of bounds for a throw in. Ruling an intentional foul is the only solution that correctly negates that possibility.