"contacting" the free thrower before ball hits rim..

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by BigCat

...
Problem is that a defender can cause the same problems the nfhs was trying to eliminate without "ENTERING" the FT semi circle. Defender can run and position feet just in front of FT line, squat and break plane of FT line. That will bother the FT shooter.
...

Sorry to steer things from the topic at hand, but I had to ask...

You could still call disconcertion of the FT shooter, and award another shot... right?

[Dad]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Sorry to steer things from the topic at hand, but I had to ask...

You could still call disconcertion of the FT shooter, and award another shot... right?

What disconcertion? The shot has already been taken and the player is legally moving. I don't care if butt, arms, etc cross the line unless there's something that needs to be a foul.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Dad

What disconcertion? The shot has already been taken and the player is legally moving. I don't care if butt, arms, etc cross the line unless there's something that needs to be a foul.

I was... nevermind. I wasn't thinking clearly. The FT shooter has to release the ball first, so the scenario I was thinking of can't happen without there already being a violation.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Sorry to steer things from the topic at hand, but I had to ask...

You could still call disconcertion of the FT shooter, and award another shot... right?

Disconcertion is to disturb the FT shooter. while the rule simply says you can't disconcert the FTer, I have always viewed it as having an effect on the current FT. If i'm the FT shooter, i release the ball and then you come and squat…the squat will bother me (disturb or disconcert) but it hasn't affected that FT. the ball is gone. It is more likely to affect the next FT because now I'm thinking about you coming at my knees.

I think this is the way the drafters view it also. If this were disconcertion then there wouldn't be a need for a separate rule about entering the FT semi circle early. You could just call it disconcertion.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by BigCat

Disconcertion is to disturb the FT shooter. while the rule simply says you can't disconcert the FTer, I have always viewed it as having an effect on the current FT. If i'm the FT shooter, i release the ball and then you come and squat…the squat will bother me (disturb or disconcert) but it hasn't affected that FT. the ball is gone. It is more likely to affect the next FT because now I'm thinking about you coming at my knees.

I think this is the way the drafters view it also. If this were disconcertion then there wouldn't be a need for a separate rule about entering the FT semi circle early. You could just call it disconcertion.

If this is the worry then I'd imagine it would've been an issue ever since players could leave on release. If the contact was enough to make someone worry about the next shot then maybe there should have been a call. Although, I'm not entirely sure what your issue is with this whole squatting thing. If the contact isn't enough to warrant a foul why is it an issue?

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Dad

If this is the worry then I'd imagine it would've been an issue ever since players could leave on release. If the contact was enough to make someone worry about the next shot then maybe there should have been a call. Although, I'm not entirely sure what your issue is with this whole squatting thing. If the contact isn't enough to warrant a foul why is it an issue?

I don't think you have read the entire thread. Maybe you have..The NFHS was worried enough to make a rule saying its a violation for a player to ENTER the FT semi circle before the ball hits etc. Contact or no contact with shooter. Violation. Adam raised the issue of did they really mean "enter" as in contact with the court in the semi circle or is simply breaking the FT plane enough? I pointed out that a player could cause the same types of problems the NFHS saw (which i don't see in my games) without actually "entering" the FT semi circle. Defender could/can actually contact the FT shooter by squatting and breaking the plane without "entering" the semi circle. That wouldn't be a violation under the rule as written now. If the contact was severe enough it would be a foul but still not a violation.

If the NFHS was worried enough about protecting the FT shooter to put in a violation they probably should have said it was a violation to break the plane. that's what i was saying...

[Dad]

Originally Posted by BigCat

I don't think you have read the entire thread. Maybe you have..The NFHS was worried enough to make a rule saying its a violation for a player to ENTER the FT semi circle before the ball hits etc. Contact or no contact with shooter. Violation. Adam raised the issue of did they really mean "enter" as in contact with the court in the semi circle or is simply breaking the FT plane enough? I pointed out that a player could cause the same types of problems the NFHS saw (which i don't see in my games) without actually "entering" the FT semi circle. Defender could/can actually contact the FT shooter by squatting and breaking the plane without "entering" the semi circle. That wouldn't be a violation under the rule as written now. If the contact was severe enough it would be a foul but still not a violation.

If the NFHS was worried enough about protecting the FT shooter to put in a violation they probably should have said it was a violation to break the plane. that's what i was saying...

I understand the issue that was brought up I just don't understand how it's meaningful -- not that it isn't, I've just never had an issues with this sort of play. I don't mind either way while I'm calling the game. I suspect they'll eventually change it to the plane line, but that's only because we aren't calling the contact as a whole.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Dad

I understand the issue that was brought up I just don't understand how it's meaningful -- not that it isn't, I've just never had an issues with this sort of play. I don't mind either way while I'm calling the game. I suspect they'll eventually change it to the plane line, but that's only because we aren't calling the contact as a whole.

I havnt ever had issues with it either. i wouldn't have added it as a violation. I'm assuming it was a problem somewhere because they made it a rule…My point was if you are going to make it a rule you might as well make it breaking the plane.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by BigCat

I havnt ever had issues with it either. i wouldn't have added it as a violation. I'm assuming it was a problem somewhere because they made it a rule…My point was if you are going to make it a rule you might as well make it breaking the plane.

Agreed, makes sense with the spirit of the new rule.

[RefsNCoaches]

Ok...so by "entering" we are talking about a part of a player touching the playing floor in the semi circle...not an arm or rear end crossing the plane of the FT line?

I guess if we use the provision of the marked lane spaces/lines then yes...

it's not a violation for any lane players to put their arms out in front of them into the lane but if they step across and touch, we would have a delayed violation on the D and an immediate violation by the O in that case.

So the ball is in flight and the D player moves to box out position, their butt crosses over the FT line at shooters waist and does not contact, he hasn't "entered" the semi circle...Got it!

Do we dare ask the class to define enter?