[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
Juulie,
I understand your frustration. However, I do see that you found the proper case book play, 10.1.5SitC. It is labeled that way because delaying the game in this manner is a TEAM technical foul under 10-1-5b. "Delay the game by preventing the ball from being made promptly live or from being put in play."

Yea, but the case isn't listed under the same numbers as the rule. How could anybody be expected to find it except to stumble upone it by accident?

Clearly the defensive team is preventing the ball from being made promptly live because the official cannot put the ball at the disposal of the FT shooter (which would make it live) until the two marked-lane spaces nearest the basket are occupied by defensive players.
That's my explanation of where it is in the rules book.

It's obvious why it's illegal, and there's no reason why it shouldn't be a technical foul, but then why not list it in the rules under 10-1 instead of 9-1? I understand why the case is under 10, but the the rule should be too.

As for 4-46, that lists the team delay of game warnings. The three items listed therein are the only reasons a warning for delay may be given. If a team delays in some other way, which does not fall under the purview of 4-46, the rules demand that an immediate technical foul be called under 10-1-5b. You should think of 10-1-5b as the general case and 4-46 as the exceptions to it. Basically, give a technical foul unless they are doing one of the three things listed in 4-46, then just give a warning.

I know all that. Why not say it right there where someone might look for it?

Now if you really want frustrating, try to prove to someone using the rules book that the warnings are separate and that a team could actually have three different warnings in the same game without receiving a technical foul. This is what I believe should be clarified in the books.

I agree about this!