Incredibly Embarrassing Moment

[Nevadaref]

1. Officiating mistakes happen to all of us. We hate it. We feel awful, but it is never as bad as we think. We are just harder on ourselves than any non-official can imagine.
2. The foul by A2 is indeed a team control foul. The NFHS has a case book play on this. I'll let you find it.
3. No one else has brought this up yet, but per NFHS interpretation A2 also committed a FT lane violation when he fouled, so that FT is now over and A1 should have only been awarded his second FT attempt wit the lane cleared. Therefore, your crew actually awarded two unmerited FTs in the administration of this.
4. Your attitude has improved a tremendous amount since you first posted on this forum. You are also going to become a much better official because of that. You are now willing to learn from others and your mistakes.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Just as the free thrower for Team A gets possession of the ball, a teammate of his on the free throw lane pushes a player from Team B that was lined up next to him.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

... per NFHS interpretation A2 also committed a FT lane violation when he fouled, so that FT is now over and A1 should have only been awarded his second FT attempt with the lane cleared.

OK. I'll bite. Assuming A2's foot didn't cross any marked lane planes, what's the free throw violation?

Caseplay (below) isn't exactly the same as the original post, but it's the closest that I could find:

9.1.3 SITUATION I: During a free throw by A1, B1 pushes A2, then B2, who is
in a marked lane space, is in the lane too soon: (a) before A1 has started a freethrowing
motion; or (b) after A1 has started a throwing motion. RULING: In (a),
the foul by B1 causes the ball to become dead immediately, therefore the act, by
B2 is not a violation. A1 is permitted the specified number of free throws, after
which the foul is penalized. In (b), the foul does not cause the ball to become dead
immediately, so there are two infractions. Even though the foul occurred first, the
violation is the first to be penalized if A1’s try is unsuccessful. (4-11; 6-7
Exception c; 9-1 Penalty 2)

[BryanV21]

How about that?

Friday night was perhaps my worst night of officiating, and last night was one of my best.

From what I read in the rule book it was not a violation. 9-1-3 d. says "no player shall enter a marked lane space or leave a marked lane space by contacting the court outside the 36-inch by 36-inch space until the ball is released."

The player that committed the foul did not contact the court outside of his marked lane space.

And part g. of 9-1-3 says "a player occupying a marked lane space may not have either foot beyond the vertical plane of the outside edge of the lane boundary, or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (2 inches by 36 inches) designated by the lane-space marks."

His feet did not leave his marked lane space.

There may be case plays that say otherwise, but looking at these rules I don't see a violation.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

There may be case plays that say otherwise, but looking at these rules I don't see a violation.

I'm sure that Nevadaref has something up his sleeve. I can't wait for his response. He'll probably pull something out of the 1953-54 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

3. No one else has brought this up yet, but per NFHS interpretation A2 also committed a FT lane violation when he fouled, so that FT is now over and A1 should have only been awarded his second FT attempt wit the lane cleared. Therefore, your crew actually awarded two unmerited FTs in the administration of this.

Originally Posted by BryanV21

From what I read in the rule book it was not a violation. 9-1-3 d. says "no player shall enter a marked lane space or leave a marked lane space by contacting the court outside the 36-inch by 36-inch space until the ball is released."

The player that committed the foul did not contact the court outside of his marked lane space.

And part g. of 9-1-3 says "a player occupying a marked lane space may not have either foot beyond the vertical plane of the outside edge of the lane boundary, or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (2 inches by 36 inches) designated by the lane-space marks."

His feet did not leave his marked lane space.

There may be case plays that say otherwise, but looking at these rules I don't see a violation.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I'm sure that Nevadaref has something up his sleeve. I can't wait for his response. He'll probably pull something out of the 1953-54 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations?

I agree. I don't see a violation here. Nothing in the OP indicates that A2 ever left his FT lane spot.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

And part g. of 9-1-3 says "a player occupying a marked lane space may not have either foot beyond the vertical plane of the outside edge of the lane boundary, or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (2 inches by 36 inches) designated by the lane-space marks."

This is called just about never.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

And part g. of 9-1-3 says "a player occupying a marked lane space may not have either foot beyond the vertical plane of the outside edge of the lane boundary, or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (2 inches by 36 inches) designated by the lane-space marks."

Originally Posted by Dad

This is called just about never.

Really? That is pretty much the basic FT violation. I see it called.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Really? That is pretty much the basic FT violation. I see it called.

My bad. Around here it is just about never called. F/JV/V1A-3A you're lucky to see it called 1/10 times it happens. I'm not entirely sure why, but I just always pregame it so it doesn't happen.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by Dad

My bad. Around here it is just about never called. F/JV/V1A-3A you're lucky to see it called 1/10 times it happens. I'm not entirely sure why, but I just always pregame it so it doesn't happen.

How in the world do you prevent a free throw violation from being called in your pregame?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Dad

My bad. Around here it is just about never called. F/JV/V1A-3A you're lucky to see it called 1/10 times it happens. I'm not entirely sure why, but I just always pregame it so it doesn't happen.

Are you saying you pregame not calling what is, by rule, a violation?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Really? That is pretty much the basic FT violation. I see it called.

I've seldom called it, but I warn them to prevent a violation if I think it's going to be a problem. I don't know why it's a gender issue, but girls always want to lift the heel of their shoe over the mark on the lane line. It's never boys. It must have something to do with having two X chromosomes.

[j51969]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I've seldom called it, but I warn them to prevent a violation if I think it's going to be a problem. I don't know why it's a gender issue, but girls always want to lift the heel of their shoe over the mark on the lane line. It's never boys. It must have something to do with having two X chromosomes.

+1

Also the ladies seem to do the box out after a three point attempt and stick thier Butt into the shooter.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It must have something to do with having two X chromosomes.

Really athletic girls have three of them.