Strategic Lane Violation

[jayedgarwho]

Am I right that the rules provide no remedy for a lane violation by the free throw defenders OTHER than a new free throw try after a miss? Even for repeated violations?

My 7th grade team leads by 2, final seconds. Opponent has the ball, attacking our basket. With under two seconds left, we're called for a shooting foul -- two shots. Assume the opponent misses the first shot. Now, expecting that he will also attempt to miss the second, could I call timeout and instruct my rebounders to ensure good position by stepping in the lane a half count ahead of when they should?

After looking at NCAA 9.2, I think why not? If we're called for a lane violation, well -- no harm on a make: our ball, ahead by 1. On a miss, nothing happens except the shooter is forced to shoot again, risking another unintended make. Our players can repeat the violation indefinitely until either (1) it isn't called and (presumably) we use our advantage to rebound the miss or (2) the shooter finally makes the shot.

(In reality, we played by the rules, didn't jump in early, the shooter missed the second shot, the offense rebounded and scored, forced overtime, and won the game. In grim hindsight I am wondering whether I missed an opportunity.)

[Jurassic Referee]

You play NCAA rules for 7th grade girls?

Coach,there's a rule in the book that says an official can call a technical foul on a team if that team allows the game to develop into an "actionless" contest. If you tried to pull the procedure that you described above, that's exactly the rule that I'd invoke. The rule was put in to stop teams from making a travesty of the game, which pretty well describes deliberate, continual violations. The T means that the other team is gonna get another 2 foul shots, plus the ball out of bounds- under high school rules. I don't think that it is a very good idea for you to go ahead with this one.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by jayedgarwho
Opponent has the ball, attacking our basket.

This is off the subject, but I'm just throwing it in for your general edification. You don't attack your opponent's basket, you score in your own basket. This is different from football, just for the record.

[Dan_ref]

Coach, this makes no sense. You're going to keep giving your opponent free throws until he makes one or in the worst case you're going to run into a crusty old b@stard like JR here who will get bored & T you up. Why is this a good strategy?

[jayedgarwho]

(1) We (and these are 7th grade boys, in fact) play under NFHS rules as far as I know. I have the NCAA rulebook at hand because you can actually buy that one in a store.

(2) I don't see the "actionless contest" language in the technical foul rules (again, NCAA) that I have. I'd appreciate a citation.

(3) Sorry if the imprecise "football" terminology confuses anyone. If I post again I'll try to upgrade the quality of my writing.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by rainmaker

This is off the subject, but I'm just throwing it in for your general edification. You don't attack your opponent's basket, you score in your own basket. This is different from football, just for the record.

Awwww geeze, gotta deduct some more points for this.

[just another ref]

This situation, or one very similar, has been discussed here before. This, I think, is covered under Intent and Purpose of the Rules. "A player or a team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule."
I think it is fair to say that this was not the purpose of the lane violation rule. Therefore, if it is apparent that a team is violating to achieve the purpose mentioned here, they should be warned, and, if necessary, assessed a technical foul.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
Coach, this makes no sense. You're going to keep giving your opponent free throws until he makes one or in the worst case you're going to run into a crusty old b@stard like JR here who will get bored & T you up. Why is this a good strategy?

Hello?!?!? Dan, put down that rather distracting little toy and pay attention11 I'll go over it vveeerrrrrryyyyy slooowwwwwly. Jay's team is two points ahead, the opponent already missed the first one. If they make the second one, Jay's team gets possession, still maintaining the lead, and can inbound, hold the ball during the last two seconds, and thus prevent what ended up happening. Get it, Dan? It's winning versus losing. What a concept...

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

Awwww geeze, gotta deduct some more points for this.

You don't deduct points when Padgett gets "detail-oriented". Oh, wait, do you?!?

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by rainmaker

Hello?!?!? Dan, put down that rather distracting little toy and pay attention11 I'll go over it vveeerrrrrryyyyy slooowwwwwly. Jay's team is two points ahead, the opponent already missed the first one. If they make the second one, Jay's team gets possession, still maintaining the lead, and can inbound, hold the ball during the last two seconds, and thus prevent what ended up happening. Get it, Dan? It's winning versus losing. What a concept...

Oh. Never mind. I was too busy with that little (little?!) toy to notice jay was up.

Coach, sounds like a good idea, plus/minus crusty old b@stards.

(BTW...points back plus more. Nice. Very, very nice.)

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
(BTW...points back plus more. Nice. Very, very nice.)

Wow, you mean, I'm getting the hang of it? Cool!

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by rainmaker

Wow, you mean, I'm getting the hang of it? Cool!

The rain in Spain falls mainly on the plain...

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by jayedgarwho
(1) We (and these are 7th grade boys, in fact) play under NFHS rules as far as I know. .

(2) I don't see the "actionless contest" language in the technical foul rules (again, NCAA) that I have. I'd appreciate a citation.

NFHS Rule 10-1-5- Team Technical- "A team shall not allow the game to develop into an actionless contest".

Or maybe a crusty old b@stard of a ref could haul this one out: Rule 5-4-1-Forfeiture- "The refereee may also forfeit a game if any player,team member,bench personnel or coach ...repeatedly commits technical foul infractions or other acts which make a travesty of the game". As I said before,I think that it would be quite easy to call repeated, deliberate violations by a team an act which makes a travesty of the game.

Don't take the chance, Coach. Imo, you'd be better off spending your time teaching your players to box out rather than looking for loopholes in the rules.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by jayedgarwho
(2) I don't see the "actionless contest" language in the technical foul rules (again, NCAA) that I have. I'd appreciate a citation.

JR gave the FED reference.

For NCAA use 10-3.19

[LSams]

A very similar situation happended this past season in the Florida 6-A boys state championship game.

I don't remember the exact situation, but the team that was shooting the free throws wanted to intentionally miss the free-throw. The other team obviously wanted them to make the shot (I think it had to do with time remaining on the clock, and being able to make a pass without the clock running).

The defending team would step into the lane (2 or three players at a time) to draw the lane violation. They did this probably 6 times before the kid "accidently" made the free throw.

I've wondered what could be done in a similar situation. There's nothing in the rule book that directly addresses this type of delay tactic. You can go 10-1-5 (or 10-3.19) I suppose you could also go with old standby 2-3.

How would you adminster this warning, penalty? Warn the players, mark the warning in the book, tell the coach, then "T" on the next one. That way there's no doubt why you've called what you've called -- or is there a better way?