The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Fri Nov 02, 2018, 09:19pm
Ok is the new good
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 654
Foul during FT

A1 is shooting 1+1 as Team B has 8 fouls. A1 shoots first FT which is successful. During the first shot B1 puts A1 on his butt and is called for the foul.

How should this be handled?

My answer is:

Clear the lane while A1 shoots the back end of the 1+1. Then line the players up and have A1 shoot the next 1+1 due to foul by B1.

Anyone have anything different?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Fri Nov 02, 2018, 09:21pm
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Toledo, Ohio, U.S.A.
Posts: 8,044
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Rookie View Post
A1 is shooting 1+1 as Team B has 8 fouls. A1 shoots first FT which is successful. During the first shot B1 puts A1 on his butt and is called for the foul.

How should this be handled?

My answer is:

Clear the lane while A1 shoots the back end of the 1+1. Then line the players up and have A1 shoot the next 1+1 due to foul by B1.

Anyone have anything different?

Award The Rookie a fine Cuban cigar. You nailed it!

MTD, Sr.
__________________
Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Trumbull Co. (Warren, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn.
Wood Co. (Bowling Green, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn.
Ohio Assn. of Basketball Officials
International Assn. of Approved Bkb. Officials
Ohio High School Athletic Association
Toledo, Ohio
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Fri Nov 02, 2018, 09:44pm
Stubborn Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,517
In high school just remember "order of occurrence". And you have administer merited free throws.

Sent from my Lenovo TB-X304F using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sat Nov 03, 2018, 01:28am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,260
Not that I'm inclined to do so, but wan't there an NFHS interpretation a couple of years ago that said crossing into the FT semi-circle and fouling the FT shooter should be an intentional foul (if before the FT is dead)? And that would mean you clear the lane, shoot the remainder of the 1+1, keep the lane cleared, shoot 2 more, then give the ball to A on the endline.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Sat Nov 03, 2018, 02:52am
This IS My Social Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at L, T, or C
Posts: 2,379
Can't Find "Intentional" on This

Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
...wasn't there an NFHS interpretation a couple of years ago that said crossing into the FT semi-circle and fouling the FT shooter should be an intentional foul (if before the FT is dead)?
Search of NFHS Interpretations came up with nothing on that score.
Below is the 2015-16 Interpretation issued before 9-1-3h was included in the book the next year. I recall this being distinctive because it, at that time, seemed to deem mere contact with the free thrower a foul. But I don't recall "Intentional" being any part of it during this clarification process.
________________________________

Clarification Preseason Guide Article “Enforce Illegal Contact on Free Thrower and Violations During Free Throw”, page 6, second paragraph: The free thrower must remain within the free throw semi-circle until the ball contacts the basket ring or the shot is made or missed. The same rule applies to all other players who do not occupy free throw lane line marked spaces. Players who occupy free throw lane line marked spaces during free throws may enter the free-throw lane upon the free thrower releasing the ball; however, should a defensive player cross the free-throw line too soon, it is a violation. A delayed violation signal is to be displayed. If the free throw is successful, the violation is ignored. If a defender contacts the free thrower, a personal foul is the correct ruling. If the free throw is unsuccessful, the violation is enforced and a substitute free throw is awarded. If a defender contacts the free thrower, a personal foul is the correct ruling. Whether the free throw is or is not successful, the penalty for the personal foul is awarded. If the free thrower’s team is in a bonus situation, the free thrower would be awarded a one-and-one or two free throws. If the free thrower’s team is not in a bonus situation, his or her team would be awarded a throw-in along the end line.

SITUATION 1: The opponent makes contact with the free-throw shooter before the free throw reaches the basket. The free throw is missed.
RULING: The official should rule a violation on the opponent and a personal foul. (9-1-2g Penalty 2b)

SITUATION 2: After A1 releases the ball on a free throw try, B1 steps into the lane and backs across the free-throw line to box out the free-throw shooter then makes contact with the free-throw shooter. The free throw is missed.
RULING: The official should rule a delayed violation on the opponent. A1 will be awarded a substitute free throw and the contact is ruled a foul. The substitute free throw would be administered with the free-throw lane spaces unoccupied. (9-1-2g Penalty 2b)
__________________
Making Every Effort to Be in the Right Place at the Right Time, Looking at the Right Thing to Make the Right Call
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Sat Nov 03, 2018, 07:38am
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,934
Intentional Foul Against Free Throw Shooter ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
... wasn't there an ... interpretation a couple of years ago that said crossing into the FT semi-circle and fouling the FT shooter should be an intentional foul (if before the FT is dead)?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freddy View Post
Search of NFHS Interpretations came up with nothing on that score ... I don't recall "Intentional" being any part of it during this clarification process.
Camron Rust is correct.

Previous to the 2015-16 season, as the NFHS was changing (again) from "hit" to "release" on free throws, International IAABO interpreter, Peter Webb, may have jumped the gun and come out with comments regarding the free throw shooter being a "sitting duck" and that if the shooter was fouled, it should be an intentional foul. I believe that his comments appeared in IAABO's Sportorials magazine. Referee magazine may have played a minor role in this confusion. I remember that I was embarrassed to be an IAABO member because it's IAABO's role to train officials, it's not the role of IAABO to make rule changes, or to interpret rules.
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

“I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36)

Last edited by BillyMac; Sat Nov 03, 2018 at 08:02am.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Sat Nov 03, 2018, 10:12am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Mentor, Ohio
Posts: 542
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
Camron Rust is correct.

Previous to the 2015-16 season, as the NFHS was changing (again) from "hit" to "release" on free throws, International IAABO interpreter, Peter Webb, may have jumped the gun and come out with comments regarding the free throw shooter being a "sitting duck" and that if the shooter was fouled, it should be an intentional foul. I believe that his comments appeared in IAABO's Sportorials magazine. Referee magazine may have played a minor role in this confusion. I remember that I was embarrassed to be an IAABO member because it's IAABO's role to train officials, it's not the role of IAABO to make rule changes, or to interpret rules.
You are not saying that is the current NFHS interpretation, right? I remember a while back we were discussing the rare possibility of a FT shooter, using a jump shot, being fouled while in the act of shooting. Some of us thought that might be ruled intentional since the shooter is entitled to an "unhindered try for goal."
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Sat Nov 03, 2018, 11:48am
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Toledo, Ohio, U.S.A.
Posts: 8,044
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
Camron Rust is correct.

Previous to the 2015-16 season, as the NFHS was changing (again) from "hit" to "release" on free throws, International IAABO interpreter, Peter Webb, may have jumped the gun and come out with comments regarding the free throw shooter being a "sitting duck" and that if the shooter was fouled, it should be an intentional foul. I believe that his comments appeared in IAABO's Sportorials magazine. Referee magazine may have played a minor role in this confusion. I remember that I was embarrassed to be an IAABO member because it's IAABO's role to train officials, it's not the role of IAABO to make rule changes, or to interpret rules.

But I think that at the time the Peter made his intepretation he was the NFHS Basketball Rules Committee Chairman.

MTD, Sr.
__________________
Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Trumbull Co. (Warren, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn.
Wood Co. (Bowling Green, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn.
Ohio Assn. of Basketball Officials
International Assn. of Approved Bkb. Officials
Ohio High School Athletic Association
Toledo, Ohio
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Sat Nov 03, 2018, 12:15pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,934
Jumped The Gun ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by billyu2 View Post
You are not saying that is the current NFHS interpretation, right?
Water under the bridge. It is not the current NFHS interpretation.

Once the NFHS decided (again) to go from "hit" to "release" they stumbled through the process, taking two seasons to get it straight, particularly with a Point of Emphasis regarding lane restrictions for the shooter that was only a Point of Emphasis with no corroborating rule support in the Rulebook.

IAABO (that is only supposed to train officials and isn't supposed to change rules, or interpret rules) added gasoline to the fire when they came up (some say unilaterally, some say after consulting with the NFHS) with their own interpretation of this fiasco.

An article in IAABO's Sportorials magazine, and maybe an article in Referee magazine may have spread misinformation.

Somehow the idea of an intentional foul against the free throw shooter entered into this botched situation, that was already confusing enough, and then shit hit the fan.

It took the NFHS two seasons to clarify, and it took IAABO getting into its proper place in the back seat, but it all eventually got straightened out.

Stupid NFHS. Stupid IAABO.
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

“I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36)

Last edited by BillyMac; Sat Nov 03, 2018 at 01:09pm.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Technical foul after foul - Good call or not (Video) JRutledge Basketball 3 Sun Jan 28, 2018 10:02pm
Foul In the Post: One Continuous Action or Technical Foul? APG Basketball 10 Sat Feb 02, 2013 08:24pm
Foul where distance gained prior to foul wwcfoa43 Football 15 Sun Feb 20, 2011 06:04pm
Can you just call a team foul if you are not sure who the foul is on? Diebler biggravy Basketball 18 Sun Dec 13, 2009 07:20pm
Anger over referee's foul calls triggers a bigger foul after game BktBallRef Basketball 10 Mon Mar 06, 2006 02:36am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:01am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1