Hmm...free throw

[SNIPERBBB]

Really interesting post on a facebook group...

According to NFHS 4-4-5, "[a] ball which touches the front faces...of the backboard is treated the same as touching the floor inbounds". This has significant consequences with regard to free throw tries which we as officials have completely failed to enforce!
Per 4-20-3, "[t]he free throw ends...when the try touches the floor". Accordingly, by application of 4-4-5, if a free throw touches the backboard, it is treated the same as touching the floor, so the free throw ends at that time and thus cannot be successful.
According to 6-7-2, "[t]he ball becomes dead...when...[i]t is apparent the free throw will not be successful on a...[f]ree throw which is to be followed by another free throw [or] by a throw-in." This means that if a free throw touches the backboard in either of these circumstances, the ball immediately becomes dead and no points may be scored.
However, when neither of the situations enumerated in 6-7-2 apply to a free throw, then the ball remains live. Nevertheless, per 4-20-3 and 4-4-5, the free throw has ended. By logical extension, 5-2-2 ("[a] goal from a free throw counts one point") no longer applies. Instead, 5-2-1 makes clear that "[a] ball that touches the floor...counts two points".
There is one caveat to keep in mind: 9-1-3 says "[the free thrower] shall throw...to cause the ball to enter the basket or touch the ring before the free throw ends", lest the free thrower be charged with a violation. Since the free throw ends when the ball touches the backboard, the free thrower can only take advantage of this extra point if the ball touches the ring prior to touching the backboard.
In sum, the rules are very clear that when a free throw touches the backboard, the free throw ends and thus only three results are possible: a) the ball becomes dead immediately, b) the free thrower is charged with a violation, or c) the ball remains live and if the ball enters the basket, the free thrower's team scores a two-point goal. However, it is NOT possible at that point for the free thrower's team to score a one-point goal, contrary to what most of us have always believed. Isn't it amazing that so many people have been doing this wrong for so long?
#rulestudy

[WhistlesAndStripes]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

Really interesting post on a facebook group...

Got a link to the Facebook post? I’d be interested in seeing the discussion there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SNIPERBBB]

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1431..._comment_reply

[crosscountry55]

Oh brother....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WhistlesAndStripes]

This could be fun.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BigCat]

There is nothing interesting there. Reading words without understanding game. Thrown ball off opponents backboard (ur own backcourt)is considered a dribble. Look at definition of try. I'm shooting at my own basket..I can use the board.

If you think it's interesting...take up basket weaving...dumbest post I've ever seen. Just someone trying to stir things up.

[SNIPERBBB]

I can see how the guy gets there, that's why I said its interesting. Obviously completely not in the spirit of the rules.

[SNIPERBBB]

I never said I agreed with any of it. Its a glitch in language but it doesn't make banking a free throw a violation or any shot the touches the backboard a 2-pointer. Spirit of the rule, not literal.

[Camron Rust]

I left that group a long time ago....way too much noise with nonsense like that.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

From what I have read from the FB group is that if a FT shooter was skilled at shooting bank shots for FTs: Of A1's FTA hits the Backboard first and then goes through the Basket, then A1 (or at least A1's tea,) should be awarded a two-point FG instead of one point for a FT.

My H.S. had a 6'-6" center six years ahead of me that later played for the USNA. He was an 80% FT shooter both in H.S. and college. He banked all of his FTAs off of the Boardboard first. Just think of how many more points he could have added to his game, season, and career totals. LOL!

MTD, Sr.

[bob jenkins]

I was assuming it was sarcastic -- and I thought it was hilarious.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I was assuming it was sarcastic -- and I thought it was hilarious.

What Bob said.

What struck me is this: if this guy goes that deeply into the rules to make a case for what he obviously knows is a gag, how seriously must he dig into the books for serious personal study!

Admirable.

Originally Posted by Freddy

What Bob said.

What struck me is this: if this guy goes that deeply into the rules to make a case for what he obviously knows is a gag, how seriously must he dig into the books for serious personal study!

Admirable.

Move over Joe DeRosa, Freddy has a new hero!

[Bcopas]

The guy left out the last part of rule 4-4-5. "see also 4-15-1." Purpose of the rules is concerning dribbling, not FT.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Bcopas

The guy left out the last part of rule 4-4-5. "see also 4-15-1." Purpose of the rules is concerning dribbling, not FT.

Didn't that rule used to say (something like) "except that it's not part of a dribble when the ball touches your own backboard?"