Quote:
Originally Posted by jdw3018
Intentionally violating is one way to differentiate this situation from holding the ball while the other team plays a tight zone.
|
And where is that differentiation mentioned in 10-1-5?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
There is no rule requiring a team to make the FT.
There is a rule prohibiting the defensive team from entering the lane before the ball hits the rim or backboard.
|
And what is the penalty for that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
When these two issues combine (repeated violations where the attempt is obviously to nullify an advantage earned by the other team), I'm siding with the team that's not actually breaking a rule.
|
That's fine, but where is your justification for "siding" with one team over another? You can use your exact same justification for calling a T on a team that's behind for continuing to foul at the end of a game to stop the clock, but we all know that has been addressed as an acceptable strategy. We call the violation(s) as they occur, and we don't get to add in another penalty just because we don't like the strategy, and it keeps us from getting to our dinner reservation on time... There is no rule that penalizes multiple violations differently than the penalty for the violation itself, other than the issues of where a delay warning can be issued, as mentioned in 10-1-5. And there is no delay warning available for committing multiple FT violations.
Realistically, how will this ever be a major issue? How many times can a FT shooter attempt to miss without accidentally making it, or missing the rim entirely? So, if they miss the rim, and they have the possession arrow, what happens then?
Again, I understand the points, but I still have not been shown where the OP's sitch is a T, other than expanding the definition of the word "actionless". (Unless, of course, someone comes up with a past interp. Then I'll shut up.
)