[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

I agree with this sentiment, but that doesn't seem to be what 2-10-6 says.

Chuck,
In the play you have constructed, once the error of failing to award merited FT(s) for the bonus is recognized, the case can be made that essentially this is just an administrative mistake in the sequence of awarding the FTs, since the clock never started after the initial error.

By the case book play below one could shoot the 1-1 with the lane clear and continue with the throw-in for Team A at the nearest spot of the intentional foul.

MISTAKE IN ADMINISTRATION SEQUENCE
8.7 SITUATION B: B1 fouls A1 just as the first quarter ends and then A1 retaliates and intentionally contacts B1. A1's foul is a technical foul as it occurred during a dead ball. Team A is in the bonus. The officials by mistake administer the penalty for the technical foul before the free throw(s) by A1. RULING: The penalties should have been administered in the order in which the fouls occurred. However, since all merited free throws were attempted it does not constitute a correctable error situation. The second quarter will begin with an alternating-possession throw-in. (4-19-5c)


However, I'm troubled by the fact that these fouls did not occur during the same dead ball period. This probably invalidates the above method.
So following the rules very strictly, since this really was a correctable error situation, it seems that the FT lane should be occupied and Team A loses that throw-in opportunity.



[Edited by Nevadaref on Feb 14th, 2006 at 07:27 PM]