9-1-3h, then a Foul vs the FT Shooter

[Freddy]

Lane space player crosses the FT line prior to the ball striking the rim or backboard and then fouls the shooter . . .
When teaching officials the process to follow when this "new" rule is violated followed by a displacement foul against the shooter, I'd like to have an easy-to-remember formula to convey to them. You know, like the four conditions required for a backcourt violation, that kinda thing
Here's what I have so far. Can you help me correct this or improve on it?

1. Delayed violation signal, then personal foul
2. Enforce the violation with a substitute free throw, if nec., clearing the lane
3. Finish the first foul if/as necessary
4. Penalize the last foul” as required with lanes refilled if nec. or throw-in

[bob jenkins]

I think you're making it too complicated.

I would just say:
1) It's two transgressions by the "defense."
a) entering the FT circle
b) fouling the shooter
2) Penalize both in the order they occur

[Freddy]

Thanx, Bob. I'm all for "simple." But what's tripping many up is when to "clear the lane." I tried last night teaching it in conjuction with an understanding of 8-1-3 ("clearing the lane") and linked it up with what they know is done on T's and intentional fouls, trying thus to ease them into an understanding of that part of it. Didn't poll everyone to see how it was understood, but I'd still like to be working on a formulaic way to express it that includes that dimension of it.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Thanx, Bob. I'm all for "simple." But what's tripping many up is when to "clear the lane." I tried last night teaching it in conjuction with an understanding of 8-1-3 ("clearing the lane") and linked it up with what they know is done on T's and intentional fouls, trying thus to ease them into an understanding of that part of it. Didn't poll everyone to see how it was understood, but I'd still like to be working on a formulaic way to express it that includes that dimension of it.

Freddy, I'm with Bob. I wouldn't cite other rules etc. if people just weren't getting it and i had to really break it down id try this:

1. Offense is shooting FTs because of a foul. maybe the first of a 1 and 1 or the second of 2 etc.

2. We have a violation by the defense and then a foul. What do we do? penalize in the order of occurrence (as Bob said.)

3. If you have any other free throws to shoot from the original foul (either because the FT was missed or there's a second shot due) you will clear the lane. why? because you have to penalize the foul that occurred after the violation. if you line everybody up for the repeat FT and play on from there you are not penalizing the foul.

4. The foul is penalized by giving offense the ball out of bounds or lining everybody up for FTs if in bonus. Both have to be penalized and in order of occurrence.

people just need to think through it.

summary--penalize BOTH in order of occurrence. thx

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Thanx, Bob. I'm all for "simple." But what's tripping many up is when to "clear the lane." I tried last night teaching it in conjuction with an understanding of 8-1-3 ("clearing the lane") and linked it up with what they know is done on T's and intentional fouls, trying thus to ease them into an understanding of that part of it. Didn't poll everyone to see how it was understood, but I'd still like to be working on a formulaic way to express it that includes that dimension of it.

You clear the lane if there is something else that needs to be administered after the current set of FTs is complete....whether that is a throwin or more FTs doesn't matter.

Or said another way, you clear the lane if the ball will remain dead (no rebounds) after the last FT of the current set is shot regardless of whether the last shot is made or missed.

[Freddy]

Penalize the Violation, if nec.
Finish the First Foul, as nec.
Penalize the Last Foul, as req.
Clear the Lane, when nec.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Or said another way, you clear the lane if the ball will remain dead (no rebounds) after the last FT of the current set is shot regardless of whether the last shot is made or missed.

Without my book in front of me, this is roughly the way the actual rule is worded. Lane spaces shall not be occupied on a FT in which the ball becomes dead [i.e. it is pre-determined that it will be dead] when the free throw ends.

Because 90% of the time this situation occurs in conjunction with intentional and technical fouls, newer officials (and fans) tend to associate this rule/action exclusively with those infractions. But this is not the case. Before, it could also happen on free throws with 0.0 on the clock, or perhaps when you have a common foul on the front-end of a 1-and-1 (to name a few examples). This new rule and administration is simply an extension of a concept that is not new.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Without my book in front of me, this is roughly the way the actual rule is worded. Lane spaces shall not be occupied on a FT in which the ball becomes dead [i.e. it is pre-determined that it will be dead] when the free throw ends.

Because 90% of the time this situation occurs in conjunction with intentional and technical fouls, newer officials (and fans) tend to associate this rule/action exclusively with those infractions. But this is not the case. Before, it could also happen on free throws with 0.0 on the clock, or perhaps when you have a common foul on the front-end of a 1-and-1 (to name a few examples). This new rule and administration is simply an extension of a concept that is not new.

Thanx. As mentioned previously, that's how I taught it last night, with a review of 8-1-3 first, then the 9-1-3h violation with a foul. What I'm looking for, however, is a nice little formula-like way to say it that's easy for officials to remember for sure recall when needed. Again, something like our "Four Conditions for a Backcourt Violation." Think "formula", come up with something, and let me know what you've settled on.

Thanx again.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Thanx. As mentioned previously, that's how I taught it last night, with a review of 8-1-3 first, then the 9-1-3h violation with a foul. What I'm looking for, however, is a nice little formula-like way to say it that's easy for officials to remember for sure recall when needed. Again, something like our "Four Conditions for a Backcourt Violation." Think "formula", come up with something, and let me know what you've settled on.

Thanx again.

No Rebounds (after the last FT of the set) = No Rebounders

[Texas Aggie]

No Rebounds = No Rebounders

First shot of a two shot free throw? First and second of a three shot?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

First shot of a two shot free throw? First and second of a three shot?

Ok, edited my statement to be more explicit.