CAn you land but not be finished landing?

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The rule.

The practice.

IOW, benefit of the doubt to "she was shooting." Don't go looking for the exact milisecond (or even second) when the rule applies.

Yes, The ones after the landing are usually pretty obvious. wouldn't split hairs on it just to prove we know rule. if in doubt shoot the FTs.

[BryanV21]

It's like how some people error on the side of charging rather than blocking. Or should I say "give the benefit of the doubt"? Either way, that's kind of how I officiate this situation.

There have been a couple times this season I called non-shooting fouls committed against the former shooter, but more often than not I've called them shooting fouls. I kind of see this like protecting the shooter.

[Kansas Ref]

I agree with Bryanv21: in that it is similar to which side you would err on. In girls games where the players seem to put so much effort and attention into vigorously boxing out---you will observe that once the airborne shooter A1 has returned to the floor and still holding follow-thru form she is then boxed out (as my old coach used to shout at me when I played hoop many years ago: "stick yer butt in his gut boy!". I confess that I do err towards issuing the shooting foul in these cases.
Mr. Pantherdreem, it seems to me as though your league managers want you to call the shooting foul despite the "shades of gray" inherent to this sitch.