Double Free Throw Violation
A1 is shooting the second of 2 foul shots. B1 enters the lane early before A1 releases the ball. A1 then air balls the free throw. It is determined by the calling official there was no distraction of A1 by B1. What is the correct call? (Sorry if this was posted earlier, but I couldn't find a thread discussing this situation.)
|
Double violation. Go to the AP arrow.
|
It is actually it is treated like a simultaneous violation. You would go to the AP arrow and give the ball to the team that has the arrow.
If there were more FTs (which you clearly stated there was not) then they would get to shoot those if they were entitled to them. Obviously, that would not apply to a 1 and 1 bonus free throw situation. Peace |
Quote:
|
Thank you grunewar for the Case Book reference. I had overlooked it yesterday even though I have it underlined.:)
|
You would also find the answer in the rule book, 9-1-4(b), which references 9-1-3.
|
FT double violation unique situation
Team A leads Team B 60-59 with two seconds left in the game.
A1 is shooting the second of two free throws. Team A has one timeout and Team B is out of timeouts. AP arrow favors Team B. Between free throws, Coach A calls their final timeout. Both teams come out of the timeout. A1 has been instructed to miss their free throw off the rim, resulting in the clock starting as soon as the ball is touched. Coach A figures that if Team B gets the rebound, the best they will have is a near-full court shot at the buzzer. If A1 makes the free throw, Team B gets to throw a long inbound pass and has a better chance at a good shot before the buzzer. Coach B anticipates this and instructs B1 to set up behind the three point line and step across the three point line before A1 shoots the ball. This will result in a violation on Team B and A1 will get to shoot their free throw again after they miss. A1 misses, B1 violates. A1 gets to shoot again. Coach B has already instructed that B2 is to trade jobs with B1 on the second shot. B2 is lined up along the lane and B2 violates by stepping in before the shot. None of the Team B players has committed an act that would constitute distraction of the shooter while violating. A1 misses off the rim again, but B2 violates. Then B3, B4, etc. Coach B made all of these instructions clear in their timeout and is not audibly calling out these instructions, but the players know what to do and they keep repeating it. If allowed to continue like this in perpetuity, Coach B is hoping that eventually A1 will shoot and either miss the basket entirely or make their free throw. On a miss, a double violation will result in going to the AP arrow and Team B will get the ball out of bounds, with the clock stopped, with a chance to win with a long pass. On a make, Team A takes a two-point lead, but Team B gets to make the long inbounds pass. The reason Team A wants to miss the free throw is the same reason Team B wants them to make it. The root of this problem is that the incentives and consequences of the free throw and the violations are misaligned. Should an officiating crew allow it to continue or intervene? If an official intervenes, is there a rule that could be invoked? |
Call a T on Team B (after a discussion with them). This has been discussed before.
|
Quote:
|
Let's Go To The Videotape ...
Quote:
|
Date After The Game With A Hot Single Mom ...
Quote:
Quote:
When has this been discussed before, I searched but can't find it, I'm probably not using the correct key words? Does it matter if the official has a date immediately after the game with a hot single Mom? https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.d...=0&w=224&h=169 |
Possibilities ???
Quote:
10-4-5: A player must not: Delay the game by acts such as: Preventing the ball from being made live promptly or from being put in play. In regard to both rules above, the ball is not prevented from being made promptly live (becomes live at disposal). I'm not sure how the NFHS defines being promptly "put in play" regarding this specific situation, although it "could" be relevant. Would free throws being attempted during a live ball be considered "actionless"? 10-4-6: A player must not: Commit an unsporting foul. This includes, but is not limited to, acts or conduct such as … "Not limited to ...". Could it be this above? Note that there isn't a "team" technical version of this rule, only a "player" technical version. Quote:
|
We Don't Get Paid By The Hour ...
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Actionless Contest ...
Quote:
Quote:
|
IMHO, I don’t want to inject selfish impatience here if the coach of Team B is clever enough to find a niche in the rules like this. Nothing unsporting here. It’s just good strategy.
Eventually something will give. And if Team A and the media and the home concession stand operator are looking for a place to direct their opprobrium, the proper forums are the state association or the NFHS rules committee after the season. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
At The Hop (Danny And The Juniors, 1957) ...
Quote:
The officials there that night can't allow the game to turn into an actionless contest that has he possibility of going on until after sunrise. The students are waiting to have their sock hop in the gym after the game. 10-2-B: A team must not: Allow the game to develop into an actionless contest, this includes the following and similar acts: Delay the game by preventing the ball from being made promptly live or from being put in play.10-4-5: My question, how does one know which team to penalize, they're both deliberately violating. Maybe the defensive team because they deliberately violate first? https://68.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l...a3vro1_500.jpg |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:24pm. |