Never thought about it this way
 

We have a shooting foul by Red followed by a dead ball tech on the Red head coach. I believe by rule we set the free throw shooter on the line with no one in the marked lane spaces and shoot the shooting FT followed by the anyone on that team shooting the Technical FT and give the ball to the offended team at the division line opposite the table. Just asking.. why don' we line up players in the lane for the shooting FT. I know there can't be a rebound but there could be a violation by either team.

No Live Ball On Miss ...
 

Because the ball will not remain live on a miss (no opportunity to rebound) on the last White free throw for the shooting foul. Same thing for the subsequent series of technical foul free throws. Because the ball will not not remain live on a miss (no opportunity to rebound) on the last White free throw for the technical foul.

Same reason we, as the trial, don't hold up our hand to chop in time on such free throws (although I will sometimes absentmindedly do so).

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Why put players on the land, in position to rebound, when there is no need.

It also gives the offending team's coach a few moments to gather all of his players in order to settle them down if he/she wishes.

They can still violate even if they're not on the lane....but it would be incredibly rare. Why would we want to put them in a useless place that has no purpose but to potentially lead to a violation?

Yes, they *could* violate, but when was the last time you saw a violation when there was no rebound coming?

Simply put, it’s just not something we do when the ball will automatically remain dead after the last free throw. Usually happens after technicals, int/flagrant personals, or some kind of false multiple/double. Less common are 0.0 situations or fouls that happen on the successful front end of a 1-and-1.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Aimlessly Wander ...
 

Actually had a defensive player aimlessly wander slightly away from his team huddle (maybe trying to get a water bottle, or a towel) a few inches past the free throw line extended during an opponent's intentional foul free throw. No distraction. Ignored it. Didn't wave him back. Didn't give the extended arm fist delayed violation signal. It would have been a got'cha call.

We don't line players up because there is no point. Since the ball does not stay live after the last free throw in this sequence (the technical foul free throws, which come after the free throw(s) for the foul in the act of shooting), there is no opportunity to contest the rebound, and no violation if B does not occupy the required lane spaces. This is the case for NFHS on all technical fouls, and for NCAA women on player/substitute and bench technical fouls. NCAAW administrative technical fouls have the game resume from the point of interruption.

This is different in other levels where possession is not awarded on technical fouls (men's college, NBA, and FIBA). In those levels, the technical foul free throw(s) are administered first, then the game is resumed from the status quo ante, aka the Point of Interruption, as if the technical foul had not happened. In this example, the technical foul free throws will be administered, and then the free throws for the shooting foul, with players lined up in the blocks.

Mom: Because I Said So ...
 

... Because it's a rule.

8-1-3: If the ball is to become dead when the last free throw for a specific penalty is not successful, players must not occupy any spaces along the free-throw lane lines.