fouling the free thrower

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Whistles & Stripes

Given that most FT Shooters shoot flat footed and never become an airborne shooter, it is almost impossible to have a foul in the act of shooting as any movement toward the shooter is going to create a delayed violation first for entering the lane prior to the ball striking the ring.

I don't really think the logic is sound (B1 enters the lane and fould A1 before A1 releases the ball -- penalize both the violation and the foul), but the conclusion is.

If someone fouls the shooter before the shooter releases the ball, it's almost always going to be intentional or flagrant.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

If someone fouls the shooter before the shooter releases the ball, it's almost always going to be intentional or flagrant.

Agree, but what about that once in a lifetime occurrence where the defensive player excitedly jumps the gun (freshman first time coming off the bench to play in a varsity game), can't hold back, and bumps (creates a disadvantage) into the free throw shooter (second of two free throws) while said player is in the act of shooting before the ball is released. It's ruled a foul against a player in the act of shooting a free throw, it's not ruled intentional, nor is it ruled flagrant.

Shot goes in. What's the penalty?

Shot misses. What's the penalty?

Citation please.

10-5 PENALTIES:
2. One free throw if fouled in the act of shooting and two- or three-point try or tap is successful.
5. Fouled in act of shooting and try or tap is unsuccessful:
a. Two free throws on two-point try or tap.
b. Three free throws on three-point try or tap.

What about a one-point try?

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree, but what about that once in a lifetime occurrence where the defensive player excitedly jumps the gun (freshman first time coming off the bench to play in a varsity game), can't hold back, and bumps (creates a disadvantage) into the free throw shooter (second of two free throws) while said player is in the act of shooting before the ball is released. It's ruled a foul against a player in the act of shooting a free throw, it's not ruled intentional, nor is it ruled flagrant.

Shot goes in. What's the penalty?

Shot misses. What's the penalty?

Citation please.

10-5 PENALTIES:
2. One free throw if fouled in the act of shooting and two- or three-point try or tap is successful.
5. Fouled in act of shooting and try or tap is unsuccessful:
a. Two free throws on two-point try or tap.
b. Three free throws on three-point try or tap.

What about a one-point try?

i'll take a stab at it--4-19-2 says a common foul is a personal foul which is neither flagrant nor intentional nor committed against a player trying for a FIELD goal....The FT shooter in your example is in the act of shooting but not for a field goal. 4-41-2 says a try for FIELD Goal is attempt to score 2 or 3 points. The FT shooter in the act of shooting meets the definition of a common foul in your example.
As you point out there is no specific penalty listed in 10-5 Penalties for fouling a FT shooter who is in the act like there is when player is trying for field goal. I think that supports conclusion that your example is a common foul. (you have said it wasnt intentional or flagrant)

i havnt sat and thought it through and through so maybe im missing something obvious etc. note--i can maybe see a foul in the act of shooting not being intentional or flagrant if the FT shooter jumps during the shot. He releases ball and is fouled just before landing. However, the player fouling a FT shooter before releasing the ball has to get in so early to get to the FT shooter it will be intentional, at least, (excessive contact) imo.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BigCat

As you point out there is no specific penalty listed in 10-5 Penalties for fouling a FT shooter who is in the act like there is when player is trying for field goal.

Bingo.

So, if the shot goes in, does he get another for being fouled in the act for shooting, as with a field goal?

And, if the shot misses does he get a replacement shot for the delayed violation; or does he get another free throw for being fouled in the act of shooting, and missing; or does he get two additional shots for both the violation, and the foul?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Bingo.

So, if the shot goes in, does he get another for being fouled in the act for shooting, as with a field goal?

And, if the shot misses does he get a replacement shot for the delayed violation; or does he get another free throw for being fouled in the act of shooting, and missing; or does he get two additional shots for both the violation, and the foul (I doubt this scenario, but would still like to study the possibility)?

If anyone fouls a free throw shooter in the act of shooting, anything less than an intentional foul is ludicrous.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

If anyone fouls a free throw shooter in the act of shooting, anything less than an intentional foul is ludicrous.

4-19-3:An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that may or may not be premeditated and is not based solely on the severity of the act. Intentional fouls include, but are not limited to: a. Contact that neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position.

For this reason (red, above)? I can certainly go along with that. Also makes the penalty easy to administer (intentional foul penalty).

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree, but what about that once in a lifetime occurrence where the defensive player excitedly jumps the gun (freshman first time coming off the bench to play in a varsity game), can't hold back, and bumps (creates a disadvantage) into the free throw shooter (second of two free throws) while said player is in the act of shooting before the ball is released. It's ruled a foul against a player in the act of shooting a free throw, it's not ruled intentional, nor is it ruled flagrant.

Won't happen.

[griblets]

I'm almost certainly calling intentional. But in that "once in a lifetime" situation:

1) Based on the play's description, there is definitely a violation. If the free throw is made, ignore the violation. If missed, award replacement free throw.

2) Because there is no try (defined by a 2 or 3 point attempt), there is no act of shooting, so the foul would be common. If in bonus, shoot 1n1 or 2, clearing the lane if necessary for the replacement and/or remaining free throw(s) before shooting bonus free throws. If not in bonus, A's ball OOB on endline, clearing lane for replacement and/or remaining free throw(s).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by griblets

... Because there is no try (defined by a 2 or 3 point attempt), there is no act of shooting, so the foul would be common.

Who says that there's no try? Who says that there is no act of shooting?

4-20-1: A free throw is the opportunity given a player to score one point by an unhindered try for goal ...

4-41-1: The act of shooting begins simultaneously with the start of the try ...

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Who says that there's no try? Who says that there is no act of shooting?

4-20-1: A free throw is the opportunity given a player to score one point by an unhindered try for goal ...

4-41-1: The act of shooting begins simultaneously with the start of the try ...

and continuous motion applies....

[griblets]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Who says that there's no try? Who says that there is no act of shooting?

4-20-1: A free throw is the opportunity given a player to score one point by an unhindered try for goal ...

4-41-1: The act of shooting begins simultaneously with the start of the try ...

I stand corrected...I think. I should have provide the following reference along with 4-41-1:

4-41-2: A try for goal is an attempt by a player to score two or three points...

It seems that 4-20-1 doesn't comply with the definition of a try as per 4-41-2.

Should we accept the free throw as a 1 point try per 4-20-1, then it would reason that the penalty would be 1 free throw, since being fouled in the act of shooting results in two free throws for a two point try, and three free throws for a three point try. In each case, if the try is successful, one free throw would be awarded.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by griblets

I stand corrected...I think. I should have provide the following reference along with 4-41-1:

4-41-2: A try for goal is an attempt by a player to score two or three points...

It seems that 4-20-1 doesn't comply with the definition of a try as per 4-41-2.

Should we accept the free throw as a 1 point try per 4-20-1, then it would reason that the penalty would be 1 free throw, since being fouled in the act of shooting results in two free throws for a two point try, and three free throws for a three point try. In each case, if the try is successful, one free throw would be awarded.

I agree with others that a Ft shooter fouled in the act will be intentional. However, if for some reason an official declares that it is not intentional or flagrant i believe the only choice left is a common foul.

4-41-2 says a try for FIELD GOAL is attempt to score 2 or 3. Your quote of 4-41-2 left the "field" part out. A FT is a try for goal but not for a "field" goal. If you look at the defintion of common foul you will see that this example fits if you declare it wasnt an intentional or flagrant foul. There is no authority in the rules to give a FT shooter who is fouled in the act of shooting a FT for the foul unless they are in the bonus. (again, assuming it isnt intentional or flagrant) It is not in rule 10. This is another reason intentional or flagrant is the right call. I've seen over the years a player or two shoot a jump shot free throw near the elbow. Even in that location, closer to the top lane spot, a foul of the shooter in the act would likely still be intentional...

[griblets]

Originally Posted by BigCat

4-41-2 says a try for FIELD GOAL is attempt to score 2 or 3. Your quote of 4-41-2 left the "field" part out.

Doh! Again, I stand corrected.

Thanks for the discussion. Helps to sharpen the brain as we enter the season.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Who says that there's no try? Who says that there is no act of shooting?

4-20-1: A free throw is the opportunity given a player to score one point by an unhindered try for goal ...

4-41-1: The act of shooting begins simultaneously with the start of the try ...

This is all purely definitional. Keep that in mind.
There is an act of shooting as well as a try for goal during a FT. However, the penalty for such a foul does not involve awarding any FTs. Why? Because the rules only specify to award FTs for fouls committed against a player trying for a FIELD goal or when a team is in the bonus.
I agree with rules explanation provided above by BigCat.