[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by zm1283

I did think of this though: If Team B violates and Team A shoots a no-rimmer on the first of two shots, is it a simultaneous violation? B does violate, but is it even a violation on A since it's the first of two free throws? Wouldn't you call a violation on B and re-shoot the first free throw?

You're not the first one to have that thought. This kind of stuff already appears in the NFHS Case Book. I strongly suggest that you get ahold of a copy and read it cover-to-cover.


9.1.3 SITUATION H:

While A1 is attempting a final free throw, (a) B1 enters the lane too soon followed by A2, both of whom are in marked lane spaces; or (b) B1, in a marked lane space enters the lane too soon, then shooter A1 steps on the free-throw line while releasing the throw. RULING: In (a), the violation by A2 is ignored and, if the try is successful, the goal shall count and the violation by B1, shall be ignored. If the try is unsuccessful, the ball shall become dead when the free throw ends and a substitute free throw shall be attempted by A1 under the same conditions as those for the original free throw. In (b), a double violation is called and the ball is put in play using the alternating-possession procedure. COMMENT: Anytime the defense violates first, followed by a violation by the freethrow shooter, the officials should consider the possibility of disconcertion. (9-1 Penalty)

9.1.3 SITUATION G:

As A1 starts the free-throwing motion, B1 hurriedly raises his/her arms. In the judgment of the official, the action of B1 disconcerts A1 and causes the attempt to miss the basket ring. RULING: As soon as the ball misses the ring, it becomes dead. Since free thrower A1 violated following disconcertion, a substitute free throw is awarded. (9-1-3a Penalty 4c)