The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 01, 2021, 08:08pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 226
1 v 5??

https://www.outkick.com/arkansas-hs-...box=1609269438

Thoughts? Was this handled correctly? I say yes! Great job by the crew and awesome effort by the kid!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 01, 2021, 08:15pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 29,389
Not much to think about. This was a 2 point game with a few seconds left overall. He got the rebound and got a shot off which if goes they win. They had a chance to win for sure. They certainly did not make it tough on him to get that shot. The rules say you continue when you have a chance to win even if you have one player left and they had a chance to win.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 01, 2021, 08:21pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,601
Yup. If the R believes the team still has a chance to win (which it did), play on!

To the article writer’s question, if the FT had been good (we’re assuming it would have been the last one), the lone player would have had to try to hit an opponent with the throw-in pass and then retrieve the ball. A good opposing coach would have just told his/her team to get far away from such a throw-in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 01, 2021, 09:00pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 25
1 v 5??

One thing that I wonder about: should there be an exception somewhere in the rules that states the first two marked lane spaces do not both need to be occupied if the team only has one player remaining? Based on literal rule verbiage, this should be a violation on the free throw without that exception.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Last edited by rwodar; Fri Jan 01, 2021 at 09:05pm.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 01, 2021, 09:03pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,601
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwodar View Post
One thing that I wonder about: should there be an exception somewhere in the rules that states the first two parked lane spaces do not both need to be occupied if the team only has one player remaining? Based on literal rule verbiage, this should be a violation on the free throw without that exception.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I want to say that was in an interp or some IAABO sportorial a few years ago, stating that in this specific scenario, this is not a violation? I can’t recall for certain...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 01, 2021, 11:32pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 29,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwodar View Post
One thing that I wonder about: should there be an exception somewhere in the rules that states the first two marked lane spaces do not both need to be occupied if the team only has one player remaining? Based on literal rule verbiage, this should be a violation on the free throw without that exception.
The violation would be for delaying, I do not think one person being in that sport is delaying anything. They cannot be in two places at once. But again if this ever happens to us then we might have to worry about that. Never seen anything in my game come close. I do remember Alabama almost won a game like this but they had either 2 or 3 players left.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jan 02, 2021, 12:56am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,021
Yes, there should probably be some verbiage to account for the case of getting down to one player. That said, when you get down to just one player, only one player is required to be in the space. It is a rare case that should be handled with the spirit of the rule even if it isn't spelled out.


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. When you're down to one player, team B can't refuse to be in the space if they don't have a player to occupy it.



I have had it happen once in my career and nearly happen a second time (in 2019).

In the first, the team with 1 had only started with 6 players. They were playing very aggressively and had a comfortable lead as they started losing players (foul outs and injury). The other team started eating into the lead a little and the team got down to 1 player with under a minute to go and held on to win.

In the second, a Boys Varsity team that had traveled form out of state had over a dozen team members on the bench but over half of them were in street clothes. They played the night before. We assumed they must have been suspended for some reason. Only 6 were dressed and they were not the starters from the previous game. They had a couple of foul outs and a couple of injuries. They only got down to two players. One of the injured came back later to get back to 3 players. Even before they got short handed, they were getting their butts kicked. After the game, in the locker room, I overheard the coach talking to the team about choices and consequences as we walked out. (They were all incredibly respectful to us as we passed by).
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com

Last edited by Camron Rust; Sat Jan 02, 2021 at 12:59am.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jan 02, 2021, 03:11am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,754
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwodar View Post
One thing that I wonder about: should there be an exception somewhere in the rules that states the first two marked lane spaces do not both need to be occupied if the team only has one player remaining? Based on literal rule verbiage, this should be a violation on the free throw without that exception.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yep, and it already exists. The NFHS issued an interpretation for this several years ago after I posted that question on this forum and someone forwarded it to the NFHS committee. You will find this in our past Interps archive.


2003-2004 NFHS Basketball Interpretations

SITUATION 2: Team A started the game with seven team members in the scorebook. All team members foul out but one, A1. Team A is leading by eight points with 38 seconds left in the game with a chance to win. A1 fouls B2 with Team B in the bonus. A1 occupies one of the first marked lane spaces for the free throw, with no teammate to occupy the other required space. RULING: By rule, a team may continue to play with one player if that team has an opportunity to win the game. Accordingly, since Team A can only put one player in the required free-throw marked lane space, it cannot be penalized. Further, Team B may not occupy the first marked lane space left vacant by Team A. (3-1-1 Note, 8-1-3)

Now should a phrase be added to the current rules book acknowledging such exemptions for a team playing with only one player? Probably, since this is now a 17 year-old interp and only a few officials are going to be aware of it.

Last edited by Nevadaref; Sat Jan 02, 2021 at 04:32am.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jan 02, 2021, 11:33am
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 19,364
Nevadaref: The King Of Citations ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref View Post
2003-2004 NFHS Basketball Interpretations
SITUATION 2: Team A started the game with seven team members in the scorebook. All team members foul out but one, A1. Team A is leading by eight points with 38 seconds left in the game with a chance to win. A1 fouls B2 with Team B in the bonus. A1 occupies one of the first marked lane spaces for the free throw, with no teammate to occupy the other required space. RULING: By rule, a team may continue to play with one player if that team has an opportunity to win the game. Accordingly, since Team A can only put one player in the required free-throw marked lane space, it cannot be penalized. Further, Team B may not occupy the first marked lane space left vacant by Team A. (3-1-1 Note, 8-1-3)
__________________
"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)
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jan 02, 2021, 11:51am
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 19,364
Something Is Rotten In The State Of Denmark ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
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.
__________________
"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 Jan 02, 2021 at 11:57am.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jan 02, 2021, 01:45pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,021
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
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.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jan 02, 2021, 03:05pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 19,364
Defiant ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
... 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.
__________________
"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 Jan 02, 2021 at 03:23pm.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 10, 2021, 05:20pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 19,364
Defiant, Refuses ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
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?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
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.

__________________
"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; Sun Jan 10, 2021 at 05:23pm.
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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:16pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1