Quote:
Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP
Somebody point me back toward where in a book (I'd love an NCAA-W book(s) reference, but anything will do) to where the case plays for "the official shall wait until the layup is successful/unsuccessful to assess the technical foul, yadayada" is supported by a rule reference that contradicts:
"Art. 2. A live ball shall not become dead when a foul is committed by an opponent of a player who starts a try for goal before a foul occurs, provided that time does not expire before the ball is in flight."
Haven't thought about that in a couple of years, can't find things, and want to know where that lives, so that I can explain how the cited rule doesn't for some reason include the HC as an "opponent."
|
Closest thing in the current books is this, though it is a bit of a stretch...fairly sure there used to be a case that involved an unsporting T on the HC,
Rule: 9.3.3
9.3.3 SITUATION D:
The score is tied 60 to 60 with four seconds remaining in the game. A1 has a fast break and is near the free-throw line on his/her way to an uncontested lay-up. B5 running down the court near the sideline, intentionally runs out of bounds in the hopes of getting a leaving-the-floor violation called.
RULING: B5's intentional violation should be ignored and A1's activity should continue without interruption.
COMMENT: Non-contact, away from the ball, illegal defensive violations (i.e. excessively swinging the elbows, leaving the floor for an unauthorized reason) specifically designed to stop the clock near the end of a period or take away a clear advantageous position by the offense should be temporarily ignored. The defensive team should not benefit from the tactic. If time is not a factor, the defense should be penalized with the violation or a technical foul for unsporting behavior. (10-1-8)