Should This Free Throw Count? (Video)
 

In high school varsity basketball, should this free throw count?

Either way, can you please cite the rule? Thank you.



<iframe width="800" height="450" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4U45wcRmqEE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Why wouldn't it?

Yes. The ball didn't go over the backboard or hit a support or wire.

Rule 7-2

I concur. Didn't go over. Shot giod


I wish I had a cool signature

It was not counted. A ref blew the whistle after the ball bounced to the top of the backboard and no point was recorded.

NFHS 7-1-2a&b: The ball is out of bounds when it touches or is touched by... the supports or back of the backboard....(or)...when it passes over a rectangular backboard.

Maybe the official thought it hit the middle support wire?

The shot counts in HS and NCAA.

The ref bought into the same myth as 90% of the fans and 45% of the coaches.

Had to educate a coach on the rule the other night. Think he was the only one in the gym that didn't know...or at least the only one the vocalize his belief.

He Should Have Read My List ...
 

The front, top, sides, and bottom of the backboard are all in play. The ball cannot legally pass over a rectangular backboard from either direction. The back of a backboard is out of bounds, as well as the supporting structures.

Looks to me like it was blown b/c she stepped over the line long before the ball entered the hoop. It was still bouncin' around on top of the board when she steps over.

:eek: You realize what you just said is not even remotely true? As soon as the ball hits the rim the shooter can cross the line.

Doesn't it seem like the whistle came from an unseen Trail?

Neither the L or C (if there is, in fact, a T in this game) has any reaction that would indicate they blew the whistle or plan to wave this off.

T here would have the worst possible angle, is obviously very far away to be out of the frame and might be straightlined into thinking it hit a support.

Not good enough to wave it off, but just a possible explanation.

To me, looks like C was on top of it and had nothing.

maybe he thought it hit something in the back, the ball did kind of go back then forward. But it appears to be the wrong call.

This belongs to the T. Seems that he was way to deep, but I do believe it's the T's and not the C's.

Agreed. Not sure why anyone would think the T has the worst view, especially considering there's an L on the floor.

Because look at the middle wire on the rim. Pretty hard to tell if it just barely touches it. As the C, nearly same view as us, has a clear view of whether the ball hit anything it shouldn't have.

T may very well have gone, well maybe it hit something, WHISTLE. Then regretted blowing air.

It still belongs to the trail, not the C. Now we can have a discussion about the positioning of the T, but the C has other things to watch, shooter, defense crossing the free throw line, other lane violations, rebounding action. This belongs to the trail.

Yes - I'm well aware the shooter can step over the line once the ball contacts the rim.

Since everyone seems to be thinking that it was whistled (falsely) because it hit the top of the backboard, what I was wondering is if the play was whistled instead (falsely) because she stepped over the line. If we're talking about an official that doesn't know the ball can't hit the top of the backboard, why aren't we considering that the official doesn't know she can't now step over the line?

If you watch the video, she steps over the line and almost immediately the whistle gets blown. Unfortunately, that is approximately the time that the ball contacts the top of the backboard.

No we don't and you completely missed the point.

Legit point. OP said the whistle was blown after it hit the top, but not what the official said/did after it happened. We don't know.

You realize that what you said is also wrong? The shooter can cross the line before the ball hits the ring. (Not in this specific play, but in general.)

Explain that please bob bc I gotta agree with OK here.


I wish I had a cool signature

1080p60
 

Why can't all clips be so?

Ring or backboard or FT ends.

backboard?

I'm confused by your question.

If it's about the word "backboard" see 1-7.

If it's about whether a backboard is included in the rule on when a player not on the lane can enter, see 10-1-3 (a couple of subsections in there).

Bob, he's implying that the shooter must wait until the ball goes in the basket before the shooter can enter. In this case the ball clearly hits the ring, so there would be no violation. Yes a shooter may enter when the ball hits the backboard, or the free throw ends, I never said they couldn't. I was only speaking to this particular case.

No one banks FTs anymore.

And I think you mean 9-1-3

NFHS deleted the words "or backboard" from 9-1-3a. Was in 2015-16 corrections.

They added it in this year and then corrected it out?

Looks like they want it deleted from E and F also.

Getting back on track, if you were the C in this situation, and the T did in fact whistle no shot because he felt it hit the supports, would you come to him with information, just as you would on an out-of-bounds play?

If T had it hitting the supports, I probably let that go. IF T says it's out because it hit the top of the backboard, I probably (try to) correct it.

Not unless he asked.

Why would he ask? The T thinks he's right. There's nothing to ask.

The C, however, has information that the call is wrong, so all I'm asking is if you would go offer that info, much as you might on an OOB call.

(Yes, Dad, I can see that you would not.)

Anyone else?

Nope. Not unless I know exactly why he called it that way. He may have seen something I didn't.

I agree the Trail will probably not ask for help here. The real question is....if you are the C and you know T got it wrong do you go to him?

Not a chance.

I don't either. Trail will have to live with that one. ;)

Let's take this one step further.

I hit my whistle and go to the trail to tell him he got this one wrong. He says, "It hit the support."

We're screwed as a crew.

Count the free throw. Top, bottom, and sides of backboard are all in-bounds.

How do you know he got it wrong? It matters to whether I'd go in.

I agree.
I don't see how one official saying that it hit a supporting wire and another saying that it didn't does anything helpful.

The person who blew the whistle has this call all on his own.

This is a judgment call just like any other call we make throughout the game. If you want to debate every one of those, be my guest, but that might be a tedious exercise. Good luck with that.

Peace

It is only a judgement cal if it is about whether it hit the wire above the basket or not. If the official is ruing that the ball is dead because it hit the top of the backboard, that is a rule error, not a judgement call.

I don't disagree.

But when I kill one of these, I point, and point and that's it. Not enough for a partner to say I screwed the pooch.

Cuz you said so and I hear to "always listen to bob". :D

But if the official making the call thinks it did, it is like arguing if the pivot foot was moved on a ball handler that would cause a travel. We do not question those calls on a regular basis either. And I see a lot of those calls reversed and traveling calls are rules based as well.

Peace

No, but if a travel was called during a throw-in, you might.

I wouldn't, because people call a designated spot violation and use the wrong signal.

Peace

That's the reason I said might. The point is, if the official makes a call which is impossible, added information from a partner may justified. In the OP, I don't see a wire or any hardware anywhere near where the ball hit, so if one was ever to interject, this might be a likely spot.

Oh -- so it's based on video review.

Then, if both C and T are watching, sure -- you should tell him what you have and why.

If both aren't watching, then it depends on the relationship between the officials.

If it's during the game, not so much.

Remember to hit play.

That's so clever it sailed right over my head.

Please explain.

I stand corrected. It is near, but whatever that is appears to be behind the board, so I still don't think it touched.

And that's why you do nothing as the C -- you "don't think it touched." Not "there's no way in hell that touched anything."

The problem here is three dimensional stuff in a two dimensional photograph. The ball never even gets on top of the board. If I was there I could see how it was put together, and if it's like I think it is, I'd know if there was "no way in hell."

And still....it's not a good place to get involved.

"It hit something up top."

"No, it didn't."

Are you going to flip a coin?

If there's nothing it possibly could have hit and I have a young partner that seems to be marginal on rules knowledge, I quite possibly would get involved. But, as a normal practice, no, I wouldn't either.

Usually when a cord is touched, it shakes. I did not see any shake. But then again the angle needed to be better.

Peace

Isn't anyone gonna mention Mr. Disrespectful walking along the baseline during the FT? LOL, I was hoping he would stumble or something.

Took looking at a video of the same school on Youtube to figure this out.

It is definitely an issue of angles looking at the OP video. It's the wire that raises and lowers the backboard. That wire extends in a path from just behind the top middle of the backboard straight over the rim and cylinder. The ball could (not in this case) even hit it bouncing straight up with out ever even getting close to the back board.

I'm guessing that this wire gets hit often that the refs are used to looking for it. This contact didn't seem excessive, but the ball was definitely close enough for it to be considered and called. I'm pretty sure the T wasn't calling the ball bouncing on the top of the backboard, because in this spot it couldn't due to the wire.

Fixed it for ya ;)

OK, let's assume the call is made, the calling ref calls out "hit the top of the back board!" His partner thinks "Oh $*&%," and starts the conference. Calling official realizes he had a brain freeze.

But what now? Count the FT even though the whistle blew before it went in? Retake the FT because the ref whistled it dead before the FT was completed? PA?

I'd never start a conference here, but if I did:

Inadvertent doesn't instantly stop a ball that's in flight for a goal. Count a make. Otherwise AP. That's if the calling official realized his brain freeze caused him/her to make a call they are 100% sure is incorrect and would stake there life on it. ;)

The whistle is not what makes the ball dead. In your sitch, once there's a conference and the calling official realizes he brain farted, I'm counting the basket.

ruling on the field stands ... I can't tell for sure from the video whether or not the ball touched the wire support. I thought it did when watching in real time, then thought not in slow motion.