How do you emphasize a rule that doesn't exist?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Yes, and according to the POE, once the violation happens the ball is dead, and contact not incidental is a Technical foul since it is dead ball contact.

Unfortunately, that is dead wrong. To prove it, consider the following: A1 is attempting a FT. B1 in a marked lane space enters the lane prior to the release. We know that this is a delayed violation. However, if the attempt is successful the try counts and the violation is ignored. If the ball were to become dead, then no point could be scored BY RULE as goals are only possible when a live ball enters the basket from above. Therefore, we can be certain that the ball remains live during the FT attempt when there is a delayed violation. Thus any foul committed during this time is a personal foul.

Anyone instructing otherwise is a silly monkey.

[Nevadaref]

Furthermore, not all violations cause the ball to immediately become dead. For example, when there is a try in flight, a leaving the court violation by the defense or an excessive swing of arms/elbows violation does not cause the ball to become dead and any foul which occurs thereafter, but prior to the end of the try or is committed by or on the airborne shooter is a live ball, personal foul.

[APG]

After hearing the process in which NFHS goes about discussing/making rules changes....especially compared to NCAA....this all really comes off as someone implementing a backdoor way to make a rule change.