1 v 5??

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The penalty for violating the rule requiring two players from the defense to be in the lower spaces isn't a delay violation, it is a technical foul before you even take the shots.

Not fully disagreeing, but this seems a little "fishy".

While there are team technical fouls and player technical fouls for delaying the game by preventing the ball from being made promptly live or from being put in play, this seems to be killing an ant with a nuclear warhead.

Wouldn't a delayed violation (also in the rulebook) suffice?

When an offensive player fills the first marked lane space we've been instructed to call an immediate (ball at free throw shooter's disposal), not delayed, double violation (on the offensive player for being there and on the defensive player for not being there), however I can't seem to find a citation or interpretation for this specific situation.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Not fully disagreeing, but this seems a little "fishy".

While there are team technical fouls and player technical fouls for delaying the game by preventing the ball from being made promptly live or from being put in play, this seems to be killing an ant with a nuclear warhead.

Wouldn't a delayed violation (also in the rulebook) suffice?

When an offensive player fills the first marked lane space we've been instructed to call an immediate (ball at free throw shooter's disposal), not delayed, double violation (on the offensive player for being there and on the defensive player for not being there), however I can't seem to find a citation or interpretation for this specific situation.

See 8.4.1b

The reason for this case is that, prior to administering the FT, we are supposed to direct the defensive team to take those spots. By them refusing, it is effectively defined and as an unsportsmanlike act for not following the directives of the officials, perhaps as a show of protest over the preceding call??

If there are players there in the wrong spots and the official doesn't notice (or they switch after the FT begins), that is only a violation (or double violation) because it wasn't a refusal to take the spots.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

... prior to administering the FT, we are supposed to direct the defensive team to take those spots. By them refusing, it is effectively defined and as an unsportsmanlike act for not following the directives of the officials ...

Similar to this?

10-4-5-C: A player must not: Delay the game by acts such as: The free thrower fails to be in the free-throw semicircle when the official is ready to administer the free throw unless the resumption-of-play procedure is in effect following a time-out or intermission. PENALTY: (Section 4) Two free throws plus the ball for a division-line throw-in.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The penalty for violating the rule requiring two players from the defense to be in the lower spaces isn't a delay violation, it is a technical foul before you even take the shots.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Not fully disagreeing, but this seems a little "fishy". While there are team technical fouls and player technical fouls for delaying the game by preventing the ball from being made promptly live or from being put in play, this seems to be killing an ant with a nuclear warhead. Wouldn't a delayed violation (also in the rulebook) suffice?

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

See 8.4.1b

2018-19 CasebookRevisions 8.1.4b SITUATION B: A1 is fouled and is at the free-throw line. Team B refuses to occupy the first marked lane spaces. RULING: A technical foul shall be charged to Team B for unsporting conduct. The lane shall be cleared and A1 shall be given the warranted free throws. Team A’s coach will then designate who will shoot the free throws for the technical foul. The technical foul free throws will be shot. The ball will then be administered at the division line to Team A. (10-4-5)

Just found this. Nice citation Camron Rust.