[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

What you say seems reasonable, Bob. But the reason for the rule change was not the play you mention in (a). The reason for the rule change was to penalize blocking the FT on the way up, immediately out of the shooter's hand.

Picture this very familiar scenario. Team A is down by 2 points and A1 is awarded 2 FTs in the closing seconds of the 4th quarter. A1 misses the first FT. We all know what's going to happen next, right? A1 is going to miss the FT intentionally and attempt to get the rebound for a put-back to tie the game.

What's the best defense against this possibility? Block the FT as soon as it is out of the shooter's hand. Before the rule change, it was simply 1 point and the ball was awarded to Team B. But this clearly is an unfair use of the rule. So to prevent teams from doing that in the closing seconds, the rule committee added the extra penalty of the T. This way, Team A still has a chance to tie or win the game. (The reason it's not a T for BI is that it's possible to commit BI while genuinely trying for the rebound; that is, while making a "basketball play". GT during a FT can never be considered a "basketball play".)

So, as unlikely as it seems, I think it's a good rule. To treat your examples (a) and (b) the same way makes sense, as I said. But to implement it, you'd need to penalize some forms of GT differently from other forms.

Chuck, you got the rule change I'm talking about backwards. Before the change it was a T for either BI or GT on a FT. The change reduced the infraction for BI to a violation only. Perhaps their was some earlier change that made them both a T but that was much longer ago.