intentional foul

[The_Rookie]

Kid shoots a shot while the ball is in the air, the horn sounds to end the 2nd qtr, before the kid lands the defender intentional fouls the shooter. So no time left, we shoot 2 freethrows, how do we start the 3 qtr???? With the AP arrow or that intentional throw in

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by The_Rookie

Kid shoots a shot while the ball is in the air, the horn sounds to end the 2nd qtr, before the kid lands the defender intentional fouls the shooter. So no time left, we shoot 2 freethrows, how do we start the 3 qtr???? With the AP arrow or that intentional throw in

AP throw-in. See 5-6-2 EXCEPTIONS

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by The_Rookie

Kid shoots a shot while the ball is in the air, the horn sounds to end the 2nd qtr, before the kid lands the defender intentional fouls the shooter. So no time left, we shoot 2 freethrows, how do we start the 3 qtr???? With the AP arrow or that intentional throw in

Read 5-6 EXCEPTIONS 4., governing technical fouls, which isn't relevant because there was no technical foul, and, since the shooter was still airborne, the ball was not yet dead when the intentional foul happened.

Then read 5-6 EXCEPTIONS 3., the middle sentence. "No penalty or part of a penalty carries over from one quarter or exra period to the next..." That's your sitch.

This was an intentional foul; it happened while the ball was still live. Therefore the foul and its enforcement belongs to the 2nd qtr.

Had the foul happened when the ball was dead, if it needed to be called, it would have been a technical foul and the shots and resulting throw-in would have belonged to the 3rd. quarter.

Right?
Something tells me there's a better way to explain the correct answer.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Freddy

"No penalty or part of a penalty carries over from one quarter or exra period to the next..."

This is my favorite part of the post:

Kid shoots a shot while the ball is in the air

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Read 5-6 EXCEPTIONS 4., governing technical fouls, which isn't relevant because there was no technical foul, and, since the shooter was still airborne, the ball was not yet dead when the intentional foul happened.

Then read 5-6 EXCEPTIONS 3., the middle sentence. "No penalty or part of a penalty carries over from one quarter or exra period to the next..." That's your sitch.

This was an intentional foul; it happened while the ball was still live. Therefore the foul and its enforcement belongs to the 2nd qtr.

Had the foul happened when the ball was dead, if it needed to be called, it would have been a technical foul and the shots and resulting throw-in would have belonged to the 3rd. quarter.

Right?
Something tells me there's a better way to explain the correct answer.

Nope, you did well. The only note I would add is that, though unlikely on a mid- or long-range shot, it is possible the ball could become dead before the airborne shooter is fouled. If so, the foul is still personal (intentionally personal in this case) and, I believe, therefore penalized as part of the 2nd quarter. Esteemed forum....am I correct?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dad]

It's not unlikely; it's impossible.

Wasn't there to see how bad the foul was, but if it was premeditated I'm probably just letting the kid sit for the rest of the night.

Clocking airborne shooters is a big no-no if it's on purpose.

[Gutierrez7]

Originally Posted by Dad

This is my favorite part of the post:

Kid shoots a shot while the ball is in the air

Dad, perhaps you could share your vast knowledge and experience and teach/coach how to properly explain a situation. Then we could all properly assist a fellow official. In your haste to mock, you missed the part of the writers name: "The Rookie".

Remember, we are all on the same team and these posts should be helpful, not a place for you to display your lack couth.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Gutierrez7

Dad, perhaps you could share your vast knowledge and experience and teach/coach how to properly explain a situation. Then we could all properly assist a fellow official. In your haste to mock, you missed the part of the writers name: "The Rookie".

Remember, we are all on the same team and these posts should be helpful, not a place for you to display your lack couth.

The Rookie has been posting for over 5 years. His name should no longer match his status.

[Gutierrez7]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

The Rookie has been posting for over 5 years. His name should no longer match his status.

Touche'

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Gutierrez7

Dad, perhaps you could share your vast knowledge and experience and teach/coach how to properly explain a situation. Then we could all properly assist a fellow official. In your haste to mock, you missed the part of the writers name: "The Rookie".

Remember, we are all on the same team and these posts should be helpful, not a place for you to display your lack couth.

Point taken. Still read it four times trying to figure out if there was a deeper meaning.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Dad

It's not unlikely; it's impossible.

Wasn't there to see how bad the foul was, but if it was premeditated I'm probably just letting the kid sit for the rest of the night.

Clocking airborne shooters is a big no-no if it's on purpose.

Not impossible. Just increasingly unlikely the further out the shot is.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Adam

Not impossible. Just increasingly unlikely the further out the shot is.

Unless you're throwing the basketball like a baseball at the rim, I don't think it's physically possible.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Dad

Unless you're throwing the basketball like a baseball at the rim, I don't think it's physically possible.

A five foot hopper could easily go through before a shooter lands.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Adam

A five foot hopper could easily go through before a shooter lands.

True.

Personally I wouldn't consider that anywhere near a mid-long range shot.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Dad

True.

Personally I wouldn't consider that anywhere near a mid-long range shot.

Me neither, but the OP wasn't that specific. I see that your response was to a post that was that specific.