Disconcertlon

[just another ref]

On our study guide and test this time several questions seemed more like discussion questions than true/false questions. There was no answer key, so we waded through on our own. What say you here?

A1 is attempting the last free throw. B4, standing in the 2nd lane space, abruptly brings their arms up aggressively over their head as A1 is bringing the ball up to shoot. The try is missed, and the ball is rebounded. Officials allow play to continue.

True or False

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by just another ref

On our study guide and test this time several questions seemed more like discussion questions than true/false questions. There was no answer key, so we waded through on our own. What say you here?

A1 is attempting the last free throw. B4, standing in the 2nd lane space, abruptly brings their arms up aggressively over their head as A1 is bringing the ball up to shoot. The try is missed, and the ball is rebounded. Officials allow play to continue.

True or False

You're right. That's not a question. I assume they are trying to say the officials were correct to let play continue--true or false. Disconcertion means to disturb the shooter. Somebody simply raising their arms up aggressively may or may not disturb a shooter. I'd like to see the shooter to be sure. i'm assuming they wouldnt ask the question though unless they wanted the answer to be false. (they want it to be called disconcertion.) clear as mud..

[Hugh Refner]

Originally Posted by just another ref

A1 is attempting the last free throw. B4, standing in the 2nd lane space.....

That would make it false. B4 would be standing in the 1st lane space.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Hugh Refner

That would make it false. B4 would be standing in the 1st lane space.

B4 can be legal in the second spot if it was vacant--assuming two other B players in the first spaces.

[bob jenkins]

Since it's only a study guide, it's probably an old question -- from when the "First" space was vacant, and the second, third and fourth spaces were (or could be) occupied by B, A, B respectively

[crosscountry55]

I'm not getting hung up over the lane space positioning issue because that's clearly not the focus of the question. I agree that this is a poorly worded question, but I think the answer is false because why even bring up the specifics of how the defender raised his arms if disconcertion wasn't the focus of the question? My two cents.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

A1 is attempting the last free throw. B4, standing in the 2nd lane space, abruptly brings their arms up aggressively over their head as A1 is bringing the ball up to shoot. The try is missed, and the ball is rebounded. Officials allow play to continue. True or False

Of course the answer is true. All of this happened, including the officials allowing the play to continue. If the play was videotaped, I'm pretty sure that we would observe all of this. What could be false about it? Is the question writer known to lie in describing situations that occur on the court?

Who wrote this very poorly worked true/false question?

B4, a singular player, yet the question describes "their" arms, instead of "his", or "her", arms".

Better question:

A1 is attempting the last free throw. B4, standing in a marked lane space, abruptly brings his arms up aggressively over his head, and disconcerts A1, who is bringing the ball up to shoot. The try is missed, and the ball is rebounded. Officials allow play to continue. Are the officials correct? Yes or no.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

A1 is attempting the last free throw. B4, standing in a marked lane space, abruptly brings his arms up aggressively over his head, and disconcerts A1, who is bringing the ball up to shoot. The try is missed, and the ball is rebounded. Officials allow play to continue. Are the officials correct? Yes or no.

This is the key. If disconcertion is a given, the answer is obvious. But disconcertion is a judgment call. From here, I can't tell if the arm movement amounts to disconcertion or not. So there is no way one can say from reading this question that the officials are not correct.

Having said all that, I probably missed the question on the test.

[rbruno]

A better question is "Does disconsertion have to be intentional". Players in marked lane spaces routinely lose their balance and stumble around without crossing the lines and violating. Should this still be considered disconsertion if it messes up the shooter while they are in their shooting motion?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by rbruno

A better question is "Does disconsertion have to be intentional". Players in marked lane spaces routinely lose their balance and stumble around without crossing the lines and violating. Should this still be considered disconsertion if it messes up the shooter while they are in their shooting motion?

Yes, it's still disconcertion. Nothing is stated regarding intent in the written rule.

9-1-3-C: No opponent shall disconcert the free thrower.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by rbruno

A better question is ...

...since the rule says, "No opponent shall disconcert the free thrower", can a player not on the floor commit a disconcertion violation?

[grunewar]

"I GOT SHOOTER! I GOT SHOOTER!"

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by rbruno

A better question is "Does disconsertion have to be intentional". Players in marked lane spaces routinely lose their balance and stumble around without crossing the lines and violating. Should this still be considered disconsertion if it messes up the shooter while they are in their shooting motion?

Nothing in the rule book states whether intent is or isn't an element of disconcertion.

9.1.3 SITUATION D tells us " If the official judges the act in either (a) or (b) to be disconcerting, it shall be penalized."

Based on this, I say it is entirely up to the judgment of the official.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

This is the key. If disconcertion is a given, the answer is obvious. But disconcertion is a judgment call.

9.1.3 SITUATION D: The ball is at the disposal of free thrower A1. B1, within
the visual field of A1: (a) raises his/her arms above the head; or (b) after his/her
arms have been extended above the head, alternately opens and closes both
hands. RULING: B1 may be penalized in both (a) and (b). The official must judge
whether the act distracts the free thrower. If the official judges the act in either (a)
or (b) to be disconcerting, it shall be penalized. The free thrower is entitled to
protection from being distracted. It is the opponent’s responsibility to avoid disconcerting
the free thrower. (9-1-3c Penalty 2)

9.1.3 SITUATION E: After A1 starts the free-throw motion, B1 commits a
common foul on A2 along the lane before the bonus rule is in effect. RULING: Even if
the foul occurs before the ball is in flight, the throw counts if successful. No
substitute try is awarded if the throw is missed. In either case, whether the throw
is made or missed, the ball is awarded to Team A at the out-of-bounds spot
nearest to where the foul occurred. If, in the opinion of the official, A1 has been
disconcerted, a substitute throw shall be awarded if the try is unsuccessful. (4-
11; 9-1-3c Penalty 2)

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)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Freddy

...since the rule says, "No opponent shall disconcert the free thrower", can a player not on the floor commit a disconcertion violation?

From the bench? Absolutely. An opponent not on the floor can commit a disconcertion violation. The rule states, "opponent", not, "player".

9.1.3 SITUATION D: ... The free thrower is entitled to protection from being distracted. It is the opponent’s responsibility to avoid disconcerting
the free thrower.

In thirty-five years, I've never called this in an interscholastic game, but I have called it once, in a recreation game, and I was confident that my call had the full support of the NFHS rule, as written.