DA Floor DA Floor:rolleyes:

Does it say only feet? I am not seeing that in the rule. Now I agree that likely that would be the best way to call the violations, but I could see someone using their bent over body to break the plane and not touch with their feet first.

Peace

I'd have to see how the rule is written, but for players along the lane lines (and the FT shooter, if I remember correctly), it's feet over or contact with the floor. Hands and hips across plane don't violate the rule.

I thought the interpretation was breaking the plane not necessarily with your feet , but we might need a clarification.

Peace

Feet cannot break the plane of any lane boundary. Other parts cannot touch floor.

I'm glad that something that so rarely happens is getting so much attention. Most officials should focus on getting whats obvious right and being consistent and that will improve their games way more than focusing on this once in a decade occurrences (which most likely are during off season AAU or freshman games).

The great thing about it is the due attention to proper free throw positioning of C (and 2-man T) and apt observance during the FT. For many for far too long free throw time has become "time off" and this rule change seems to be bringing things in a good direction.

Especially if called if/when it happens, the violation will become rare. Before the rule and cautionary preventative officiating regarding it, it was not uncommon around here. From dozens of clips from previous years:

Displacement of FTer 1
Early Entry and FT Line Violation
Displacement of FTer 2

Release ...
 

For "regular" free throw violations, it is, indeed, the feet and the boundary plane (as well as the touch in the lane, which was added a few years ago as a casebook play). Since the switch to the "release", the violation for crossing the free throw line by a "rebounder" has never been clarified by the NFHS.

With that in mind, everyone take a look at Freddy's third video. I don't think the defender's feet cross the free-throw line before the restrictions end, but her butt sure does, and there IS a foul there (not disputing that). So....is there also a delayed violation here? I agree with Billy; the new rule is not clear and may need a little editing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BTW, these and the other dozen or so video clips I have of this violation and subsequent follow-up foul were from 2 years ago. Because this "new" rule was already in force last year by the POE, and our guys around here did a pretty good job of policing it, I could find not one similar situation of all the video that I reviewed from last year. So as I say it should disappear. Plus a lot of the occurrences are so close that they don't merit a violation, however preventive officiating takes care of it after that.

Changes always get extra attention for a couple of years. If you don't like it, you're free to read other posts.

#2 is the only foul I see. #3 just looks ugly and it's what I would expect from a girls game.