The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   FT Shooter Fouled (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/100530-ft-shooter-fouled.html)

The_Rookie Fri Dec 18, 2015 11:04pm
FT Shooter Fouled
 
A1 is shooting 2....B1 commits a Hard Foul on A1 who has not left her spot on FT line and ends up on the floor.

The contact is deemed excessive as B1 was going with her bottom right at A1's knee.

Question:

1) If this happens after the 1st FT..is this a Technical Foul?

2) If this happens after 2nd FT..is this an Intentional Foul?

bob jenkins Fri Dec 18, 2015 11:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Rookie (Post 973425)
A1 is shooting 2....B1 commits a Hard Foul on A1 who has not left her spot on FT line and ends up on the floor.

The contact is deemed excessive as B1 was going with her bottom right at A1's knee.

Question:

1) If this happens after the 1st FT..is this a Technical Foul?

2) If this happens after 2nd FT..is this an Intentional Foul?
Assuming the contact rises to the level of a foul,

Is live-ball contact ever a T?

Is dead-ball contact (other than on or by an airborne shooter) ever not a T?

Are "Intentional" and "Technical" exclusive? Or, could this be an Intentional Technical?

Dad Fri Dec 18, 2015 11:11pm
Why would it matter if it was 1st or 2nd FT for whether it was intentional/tech?

Live ball on a FT

bob jenkins Fri Dec 18, 2015 11:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad (Post 973427)
Why would it matter if it was 1st or 2nd FT for whether it was intentional/tech?

Live ball on a FT
Sure -- but *after* the FT (which was the question) is going to be a dead ball after the first FT and may or may not be a dead ball after the second FT.

The_Rookie Fri Dec 18, 2015 11:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad (Post 973427)
Why would it matter if it was 1st or 2nd FT for whether it was intentional/tech?

Live ball on a FT
My partner who is a Veteran Made the call and in our Post game discussed it.

He told me that after the 1st FT..ball is dead thus a "T"

After 2nd FT, ball is alive thus Intentional.

Is his thought process correct?

Dad Fri Dec 18, 2015 11:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 973428)
Sure -- but *after* the FT (which was the question) is going to be a dead ball after the first FT and may or may not be a dead ball after the second FT.
Seemed like the OP may have though dead ball on first FT and live ball on second.

Dad Fri Dec 18, 2015 11:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Rookie (Post 973429)
My partner who is a Veteran Made the call and in our Post game discussed it.

He told me that after the 1st FT..ball is dead thus a "T"

After 2nd FT, ball is alive thus Intentional.

Is his thought process correct?
You post said deemed it excessive. That excessive statement in the rules only applies to a live ball foul, not dead.

I'd find it extremely hard to find a T on this play.

BlueDevilRef Fri Dec 18, 2015 11:39pm
From the description, I would be okay with an intentional. Not a T though. Seems it was a really excessive contact box out. No place for that, especially since fouls on FT and line violations on FT's is a POE this year.


I wish I had a cool signature

The_Rookie Fri Dec 18, 2015 11:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad (Post 973431)
You post said deemed it excessive. That excessive statement in the rules only applies to a live ball foul, not dead.

I'd find it extremely hard to find a T on this play.
My apologies..What our Post game discussion focused on was that if the foul occurred after 1st FT..this is dead ball contact and a T. Since it actually occurred after 2nd FT it is live ball and ruled Excessive and thus Intentional

Dad Fri Dec 18, 2015 11:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueDevilRef (Post 973432)
From the description, I would be okay with an intentional. Not a T though. Seems it was a really excessive contact box out. No place for that, especially since fouls on FT and line violations on FT's is a POE this year.


I wish I had a cool signature
I thought the only emphasis was the defense crossing the FT line before the shot hit the rim. FT shooter can't cross and no one can come in. What's this POE you're talking about?

Dad Fri Dec 18, 2015 11:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Rookie (Post 973433)
My apologies..What our Post game discussion focused on was that if the foul occurred after 1st FT..this is dead ball contact and a T. Since it actually occurred after 2nd FT it is live ball and ruled Excessive and thus Intentional
Could very well be intentional on the 1st FT also depending on when the contact was.

Was the girl just boxing her out and displaced her? For me it really has to be a windup hit on a box out for me to even consider a tech/intentional.

bob jenkins Sat Dec 19, 2015 12:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Rookie (Post 973429)
My partner who is a Veteran Made the call and in our Post game discussed it.

He told me that after the 1st FT..ball is dead thus a "T"
That's correct -- it's an Intentional Technical Foul

Quote:
After 2nd FT, ball is alive thus Intentional.
Assuming the FT is missed, it's an Intentional Personal Foul. IF the FT was made, the ball is dead, so it's an Intentional Technical Foul.

And, in either case, if the contact was somehow before the FT Ended (see the rule on FTs to determine this), both are IP fouls.

Rule 4 is your friend.

Nevadaref Sat Dec 19, 2015 03:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 973436)
That's correct -- it's an Intentional Technical Foul



Assuming the FT is missed, it's an Intentional Personal Foul. IF the FT was made, the ball is dead, so it's an Intentional Technical Foul.

And, in either case, if the contact was somehow before the FT Ended (see the rule on FTs to determine this), both are IP fouls.

Rule 4 is your friend.
The above answer by Bob is correct.
You need to determine whether the FT was still in progress or over for the first attempt. For the second, you do the same, but realize that the ball remains live on an unsuccessful attempt.

Nevadaref Sat Dec 19, 2015 03:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad (Post 973431)
You post said deemed it excessive. That excessive statement in the rules only applies to a live ball foul, not dead.

I'd find it extremely hard to find a T on this play.
Not true. Otherwise we wouldn't have rule instructing us to ignore dead ball contact which isn't intentional or flagrant.

BlueDevilRef Sat Dec 19, 2015 08:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad (Post 973434)
I thought the only emphasis was the defense crossing the FT line before the shot hit the rim. FT shooter can't cross and no one can come in. What's this POE you're talking about?

I thought some of the emphasis was on contact as well. Maybe not actually a POE but it is mentioned within the flyer that comes out with rule books. POE was likely misspeaking on my part.


I wish I had a cool signature

Dad Sat Dec 19, 2015 09:24am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 973442)
Not true. Otherwise we wouldn't have rule instructing us to ignore dead ball contact which isn't intentional or flagrant.
How is it not true? I don't really see the relevance as there are rules which apply to dead ball contact; this just isn't one of them.

d. Excessive contact with an opponent while the ball is live or until an airborne shooter returns to the floor

It's even the only highlighted part of this rule.

johnny d Sat Dec 19, 2015 10:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Rookie (Post 973429)
After 2nd FT, ball is alive thus Intentional.

Is his thought process correct?
Must have been hard to play the rest of the game once the ball started doing what it wanted :D

Adam Sat Dec 19, 2015 10:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad (Post 973431)
You post said deemed it excessive. That excessive statement in the rules only applies to a live ball foul, not dead.

I'd find it extremely hard to find a T on this play.
Not quite true. Excessive is part of the definition of intentional foul, which is how we determine whether to ignore dead ball contact or call a technical foul.

The only way the ball is live immediately after a FT is over is if the shot is missed.

Most of these fouls are going to actually occur during the free throw, not after.

Rob1968 Sat Dec 19, 2015 11:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad (Post 973447)
How is it not true? I don't really see the relevance as there are rules which apply to dead ball contact; this just isn't one of them.

d. Excessive contact with an opponent while the ball is live or until an airborne shooter returns to the floor

It's even the only highlighted part of this rule.
Perhaps we consider 10-3-7 to speak to the subject:

A player shall not . . . Intentionally or flagrantly contact an opponent when the ball is dead and such contact is not a personal foul.

Dad Sat Dec 19, 2015 11:24am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam (Post 973450)
Not quite true. Excessive is part of the definition of intentional foul, which is how we determine whether to ignore dead ball contact or call a technical foul.

The only way the ball is live immediately after a FT is over is if the shot is missed.

Most of these fouls are going to actually occur during the free throw, not after.
The vet in the OP said T so it'd have to be dead ball.

I believe officials are misusing the word excessive and why it was put into the rule book and highlighted for that matter. There's even a case book where there is a BLOCK and then contact. The foul is ruled intentional because the contact was excessive. Just because something is excessive, more than normal contact doesn't mean I'm calling anything on a dead ball. Now, there's a lot in the rules on when to call a dead ball technical for contact, and I don't think this was the intent of putting the word excessive on paper.

I'm not saying excessive contact is an automatic pass. I am saying that ruling contact is excessive and an easy intentional during live ball doesn't mean I'm calling a tech during a dead ball.

I don't see the connection between a live ball intentional due to excessive contact and there being a T on the same play in dead ball situation. I don't believe this statement can be used by itself as a reason for a T on the OPs play.

Dad Sat Dec 19, 2015 11:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob1968 (Post 973452)
Perhaps we consider 10-3-7 to speak to the subject:

A player shall not . . . Intentionally or flagrantly contact an opponent when the ball is dead and such contact is not a personal foul.
Consider it and then read what I wrote. If that's not enough go to the rule definitions and then the corresponding case book studies. You don't need to bother with the word excessive on a dead ball technical. You do however have to use it during live ball, especially during an airborne shooter situation. The casebook talks about a shooting situation when there is excessive contact.

During a live ball, on a normal play, I'm likely to call an intentional if there is excessive contact. During a dead ball you don't ask yourself if it was excessive and then decide to give a technical. The part of the rule I quoted doesn't ever need to be used to decide if you're giving a T during dead ball.

Adam Sat Dec 19, 2015 11:40am
The rule is that dead ball contact is to be ignored unless it is deemed intentional or flagrant. Unless you're going to include "excessive" as a means of determining whether or not it can be deemed intentional, then it sounds like the contact in the OP should have been ignored.

just another ref Sat Dec 19, 2015 03:19pm
It is a given in the OP that the contact was ruled to be excessive. If so, I see no way to ignore it. The definition for an intentional personal foul and an intentional technical foul are, for all practical purposes, the same definition.

Raymond Sat Dec 19, 2015 07:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Rookie (Post 973429)
My partner who is a Veteran Made the call and in our Post game discussed it.

He told me that after the 1st FT..ball is dead thus a "T"

After 2nd FT, ball is alive thus Intentional.

Is his thought process correct?
Did the contact occur after the free throw ended or before it ended?

jmwking Sat Dec 19, 2015 10:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Rookie (Post 973429)
My partner who is a Veteran Made the call and in our Post game discussed it.

He told me that after the 1st FT..ball is dead thus a "T"

After 2nd FT, ball is alive thus Intentional.

Is his thought process correct?
You don't say which rules. In NCAA, a ball is live when at the disposal of the free-thrower. No distinction between which of any particular set of FTs.

Scooby Sat Dec 19, 2015 10:29pm
I found this on the NFHS website.
Clarification Preseason Guide Article “Enforce Illegal Contact on Free Thrower and Violations During Free Throw”, page 6, second paragraph: The free thrower must remain within the free throw semi-circle until the ball contacts the basket ring or the shot is made or missed. The same rule applies to all other players who do not occupy free throw lane line marked spaces. Players who occupy free throw lane line marked spaces during free throws may enter the free-throw lane upon the free thrower releasing the ball; however, should a defensive player cross the free-throw line too soon, it is a violation. A delayed violation signal is to be displayed. If the free throw is successful, the violation is ignored. If a defender contacts the free thrower, a personal foul is the correct ruling. If the free throw is unsuccessful, the violation is enforced and a substitute free throw is awarded. If a defender contacts the free thrower, a personal foul is the correct ruling. Whether the free throw is or is not successful, the penalty for the personal foul is awarded. If the free thrower’s team is in a bonus situation, the free thrower would be awarded a one-and-one or two free throws. If the free thrower’s team is not in a bonus situation, his or her team would be awarded a throw-in along the end line.

BlueDevilRef Sat Dec 19, 2015 10:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooby (Post 973494)
I found this on the NFHS website.

Clarification Preseason Guide Article “Enforce Illegal Contact on Free Thrower and Violations During Free Throw”, page 6, second paragraph: The free thrower must remain within the free throw semi-circle until the ball contacts the basket ring or the shot is made or missed. The same rule applies to all other players who do not occupy free throw lane line marked spaces. Players who occupy free throw lane line marked spaces during free throws may enter the free-throw lane upon the free thrower releasing the ball; however, should a defensive player cross the free-throw line too soon, it is a violation. A delayed violation signal is to be displayed. If the free throw is successful, the violation is ignored. If a defender contacts the free thrower, a personal foul is the correct ruling. If the free throw is unsuccessful, the violation is enforced and a substitute free throw is awarded. If a defender contacts the free thrower, a personal foul is the correct ruling. Whether the free throw is or is not successful, the penalty for the personal foul is awarded. If the free thrower’s team is in a bonus situation, the free thrower would be awarded a one-and-one or two free throws. If the free thrower’s team is not in a bonus situation, his or her team would be awarded a throw-in along the end line.

This is what I was talking about. Not really a POE but still something to be aware of. And might not even be a rule change, I've not done it long enough to know better


I wish I had a cool signature

just another ref Sat Dec 19, 2015 10:44pm
But all this doesn't address the question of dead ball contact. For this to be a violation, the defender has to cross the free throw line before the ball hits.

Raymond Sun Dec 20, 2015 08:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 973496)
But all this doesn't address the question of dead ball contact. For this to be a violation, the defender has to cross the free throw line before the ball hits.
The description of the play in the OP is very lacking.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

bob jenkins Sun Dec 20, 2015 08:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmwking (Post 973491)
You don't say which rules. In NCAA, a ball is live when at the disposal of the free-thrower. No distinction between which of any particular set of FTs.
Same in FED.

But, either way, I'm pretty sure that the OP didn't happen while the ball was at the disposal of the FT shooter (although it's possible), but rather after the ball had been released by B1 (or whoever) was "blocking out."

BillyMac Sun Dec 20, 2015 10:00am
Does Green Giant Sell Canned Worms ???
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 973510)
... pretty sure that the OP didn't happen while the ball was at the disposal of the FT shooter (although it's possible) ...
How about a foul against a free throw shooter while in the act of shooting the free throw? It will never happen but it is "possible". That would really open up a can of worms.

https://sp.yimg.com/xj/th?id=OIP.M0c...=0&w=300&h=300

Raymond Sun Dec 20, 2015 10:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 973511)
How about a foul against a free throw shooter while in the act of shooting the free throw? It will never happen but it is "possible". That would really open up a can of worms.

https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=OIP.M19...3&h=118#inline
It would be an intentional foul. You don't accidentally foul a free throw shooter who still has the ball.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

BillyMac Sun Dec 20, 2015 10:49am
Intentional Foul ...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 973512)
It would be an intentional foul. You don't accidentally foul a free throw shooter who still has the ball.
Fully agree with first sentence (intentional foul). I don't fully agree with the second (don't accidentally).

Intentional fouls don't always (although many do) have to be intentional (dictionary definition: intended, or on purpose). Sometimes they are accidental, that is, not done to purposely foul.

Here's the citation that I would use to charge an intentional foul:

4-19-3-A: 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: Contact that neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position.

The free the shooter is supposed to have the advantage of an unhindered shot. Illegal contact with the free throw shooter while in the act of shooting a free throw obviously neutralizes a free throw shooter's advantageous position.

Raymond Sun Dec 20, 2015 10:02pm
How the heck would you accidentally foul a free throw shooter who still has the ball?

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

BillyMac Sun Dec 20, 2015 11:26pm
A Million Monkeys With A Million Typewriters ...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 973551)
How the heck would you accidentally foul a free throw shooter who still has the ball?
Probably won't happen in a million games.

Freshman is sitting on the varsity bench all season. Finally, in a lopsided game, he gets his first chance to play in the varsity game. His adrenaline kicks in. He lines up as a defender on the lane line for the second of two free throws. Head coach yells to him to be sure to box out the shooter. Free throw shooter has a little hitch in his shooting motion. Freshman enters the lane before the release (delayed violation), and crosses the free throw line, also before the release (another delayed violation), and now, with his back to the shooter, boxes out and displaces the shooter while the shooter is still in the act of shooting, possibly as an airborne shooter.

It won't happen, but that doesn't mean that it, theoretically, can't happen.

In a real game, I don't have to decide if the illegal contact is accidental, or on purpose, because I've got all the rule backing for an intentional foul that I need with: Contact that neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position.

Nevadaref Sun Dec 20, 2015 11:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam (Post 973457)
The rule is that dead ball contact is to be ignored unless it is deemed intentional or flagrant. Unless you're going to include "excessive" as a means of determining whether or not it can be deemed intentional, then it sounds like the contact in the OP should have been ignored.
That was the point which I was attempting to make. Thank you for writing it rather succinctly.

Nevadaref Mon Dec 21, 2015 12:01am
"Clarification Preseason Guide Article “Enforce Illegal Contact on Free Thrower and Violations During Free Throw”, page 6, second paragraph: The free thrower must remain within the free throw semi-circle until the ball contacts the basket ring or the shot is made or missed."

Grrrr.....it is annoying when the NFHS cannot get its own rules right.
The restrictions for the free thrower and all players not in marked lane spaces end when the ball strikes the ring/flange, BACKBOARD, or the try is successful.

The people writing the clarification need to remember to include the backboard!

BillyMac Mon Dec 21, 2015 12:03am
Hard Foul ...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Rookie (Post 973425)
B1 commits a Hard Foul on A1 ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam (Post 973457)
The rule is that dead ball contact is to be ignored unless it is deemed intentional or flagrant. Unless you're going to include "excessive" as a means of determining whether or not it can be deemed intentional, then it sounds like the contact in the OP should have been ignored.
Here in my little corner of Connecticut (When in Rome ...) we equate a "hard foul" with an excessive contact intentional foul, and we actually have our own unauthorized signal for such a foul. So when I hear "hard foul", I automatically think of an intentional foul. Others should check their local listings.

4-19-3-D: 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: Excessive contact with an opponent while playing the ball.

https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7756/1...cfc19d22_m.jpg

Nevadaref Mon Dec 21, 2015 12:09am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad (Post 973447)
How is it not true? I don't really see the relevance as there are rules which apply to dead ball contact; this just isn't one of them.

d. Excessive contact with an opponent while the ball is live or until an airborne shooter returns to the floor

It's even the only highlighted part of this rule.
The NFHS rule editors have been messing around with the definition of an intentional foul for a few years now in an attempt to make officials more aware of the proper situations in which to call one.

I will have to check my previous rule book editions for the exact wording, but the content of rule itself was not supposed to have changed. The text was edited only as a clarification, not a rule change. So whatever the rule was for the past decade is still the rule.

Basically, you need to know that normal contact during a dead ball should be ignored, while that which would be deemed intentional or flagrant needs to be penalized.

For example, if A1 is driving the lane and travels, then attempts a shot and B1 "fouls" this opponent in a normal manner, the contact would be ignored when an official calls the traveling violation. The ball became dead when the traveling violation occurred. However, if B1 were to cause excessive contact on A1 in this situation, then assessing an intentional technical foul would be proper.

ballgame99 Mon Dec 21, 2015 09:34am
My confusion on this is can you have a violation AND a foul on the same play?

So if we are shooting the front end of a 1 and 1 and B2 boxes out and crosses the line before the hit, continues into the shooter enough to be considered a foul before the hit, and the free throw misses...

What do I have? The way it has been explained to me is I should ignore the violation and call the foul, then adjudicate the foul appropriately. So in this case, the FT is missed, but I called a foul on the rebound, so the same shooter starts a fresh 1 and 1. But that never seemed right to me since the violation should have resulted in a reshot.

bob jenkins Mon Dec 21, 2015 10:03am
In general, yes, you would have both a violation and a foul.

I have heard of some jurisdictions where they only want the foul penalized in your situation.

Here are two current year interpretations on the same play:

SITUATION 1: The opponent makes contact with the free-throw shooter before the free throw reaches the basket. The free throw is missed.
RULING: The official should rule a violation on the opponent and a personal foul. (9-1-2g Penalty 2b)

SITUATION 2: After A1 releases the ball on a free throw try, B1 steps into the lane and backs across the free-throw line to box out the free-throw shooter then makes contact with the free-throw shooter. The free throw is missed.
RULING: The official should rule a delayed violation on the opponent. A1 will be awarded a substitute free throw and the contact is ruled a foul. The substitute free throw would be administered with the free-throw lane spaces unoccupied. (9-1-2g Penalty 2b)

BillyMac Mon Dec 21, 2015 05:19pm
Tastes Great And Less Filling ......
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ballgame99 (Post 973582)
My confusion on this is can you have a violation AND a foul on the same play? ... since the violation should have resulted in a reshot.
It should have been a delayed violation and then another free throw if missed, and then penalize the foul accordingly.

BrentD2222 Mon Jan 04, 2016 03:56am
The result is all the same?

Raymond Mon Jan 04, 2016 08:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrentD2222 (Post 975067)
The result is all the same?
The result being what?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:59am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1