Delay Throwin Or Free Throw ...

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

4-38: The resumption-of-play procedure is used to prevent delay in putting the ball in play when a throw-in team does not make a thrower available or following a time-out or intermission (unless either team is not on the court to start the second half) as in 7-5-1 and 8-1-2. The procedure results in a violation instead of a technical foul for initial delay in specific situations.

My general question is: Why do interpreters/trainers often stress that the resumption-of-play procedure is used following a timeout or intermission, when in reality it is used in many other situations not necessarily following a timeout or intermission, with two main exceptions, delay by the free thrower, and starting the second half, both of which are immediate technical fouls that do not involve placing the ball on the floor or giving it to the team who is not delaying.

What trainers are you talking about? Are you assuming facts not in evidence?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by billymac

i’m still looking for rulebook and/or casebook citations if defenders delay getting into the first lane spaces on a free throw but the delay does not come after a timeout or intermission?

8.1.4b

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

On a free throw, assuming there is no timeout, the ball will be placed at the free thrower's disposal. A is not required to have people in the lane spaces, only B. If B is not in the lane spaces, the free throws will be administered, with a violation against B for not occupying the required spaces if the free throw is missed.

Incorrect.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

I don't know what this means: "or give it to the team who is not delaying?"

Good catch Raymond. Thank you.

Giving the ball it to the team who is not delaying usually occurs only after a timeout or intermission. Inbounding team is ready. Team not inbounding is still in their huddle even after the second horn and a strong whistle by the official. Give the ball to the inbounding team for an uncontested layup. For most officials, more of a rulebook written exam question rather than a real game situation. Most officials would use their game management skills (patience, location, voice, whistle) to get the non-inbounding team out onto the court.

That's (after a timeout or intermission) already covered in the resumption-of-play procedure rule.

More likely is putting the ball the floor when the inbounding team doesn't make an inbounder available. That can occur both after after a timeout or intermission, or not after a timeout or intermission. Resumption-of-play procedure covers after a timeout or intermission, casebook play (but no rule) covers not after a timeout or intermission.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

What trainers are you talking about?

IAABO, every time this casebook play is used as an exam question and discussed.

10.4.5 SITUATION: The ruling official has reported the foul and has given directions to players along the lane. The official is ready to put the ball at free thrower A1’s disposal, but A1 is at the sideline talking to the coach ...

"We don't use the resumption-of-play procedure in this situation because it's NOT after a timeout or intermission".

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

8.1.4b

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I’m still looking for rulebook and/or casebook citations if defenders delay getting into the first lane spaces on a free throw but the delay does not come after a timeout or intermission?

Bingo.

8.1.4 SITUATION B.

Thanks bob jenkins.

I had no idea that this was in the casebook. I wonder when was it added to the casebook?



Not after a timeout or intermission. Technical foul charged to team not getting into the first lane spaces on a free throw.

Similar to the penalty for delay by the free thrower not after a timeout or intermission. Seems fair and just.

[ilyazhito]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Incorrect.

Rule 9-1-2 says that "Teams shall properly occupy marked lane spaces according to number and space requirements". Therefore, B not having players in the first marked lane spaces is a violation. I also cited the penalty under Rule 9 section 1.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Bingo.

Thanks bob jenkins.

I had no idea that this was in the casebook. I wonder when was it added to the casebook?

25 years ago or more

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

IAABO, every time this casebook play is used as an exam question and discussed.

10.4.5 SITUATION: The ruling official has reported the foul and has given directions to players along the lane. The official is ready to put the ball at free thrower A1’s disposal, but A1 is at the sideline talking to the coach ...

"We don't use the resumption-of-play procedure in this situation because it's NOT after a timeout or intermission".

We don't do our training through IAABO. A lot of associations don't. You should probably address that concern directly to IAABO.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

IAABO, every time this casebook play is used as an exam question and discussed.

10.4.5 SITUATION: The ruling official has reported the foul and has given directions to players along the lane. The official is ready to put the ball at free thrower A1’s disposal, but A1 is at the sideline talking to the coach ...

"We don't use the resumption-of-play procedure in this situation because it's NOT after a timeout or intermission".

"This situation" refers to the FT.

Resumption of play:
1) Throw-in; or
2) After TO; or
3) After intermission (unless either team is not on court to start second half)

[BillyMac]

That's what I was looking for. Citations.

Citations posted by bob jenkins (8.1.4 SITUATION B), and Nevadaref (9.2.9 SITUATION), with constructive criticism posted by Raymond, along with citations already posted by me, have satisfied my curiosity. Even though some casebook citations do not seem to have associated rule citations, the are no rules contrary to these casebook citations, so the casebook citations are just as good a rule citations, thus, I no longer need rule citations.



Always listen to bob.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I had no idea that this was in the casebook. I wonder when was it added to the casebook?

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

25 years ago or more

Added to the casebook in 2018-19.

Always listen to bob, except for math problems.

Note: My "go to" searchable PDF casebook is from 2016-17. Anybody have a newer version for me? Send me Forum Private Message and I'll send my real email address.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

We don't do our training through IAABO. A lot of associations don't.

I know that and Raymond probably also knows that I know that, but I did go back and change "interpreters/trainers" to "my interpreters/trainers".

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Resumption of play:
1) Throw-in; or
2) After TO; or
3) After intermission (unless either team is not on court to start second half)

Great post bob jenkins.

I just spotted the word "or" in 4-38, however the 7-5-1 has a comma instead of an "or", which is what confused me.

4-38: The resumption-of-play procedure is used to prevent delay in putting the ball in play when a throw-in team does not make a thrower available or following a time-out or intermission (unless either team is not on the court to start the second half) as in 7-5-1 and 8-1-2. The procedure results in a violation instead of a technical foul for initial delay in specific situations.

7-5-1: When a team does not make a thrower available, after a timeout (as in 7-4-4) or the intermission between any quarter (as in 6-2-3), the resumption-of-play procedure is used to prevent delay. The administering official will sound the whistle to indicate play will resume ...

The "or" is important, it covers all throwins, both after a timeout or intermission and not after a timeout or intermission.

Not so for free throws. After a timeout or intermission (resumption-of-play) is not the same as not after a timeout or intermission (technical foul).

(Aside from starting second half.)

I learned a lot today. Thanks.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Added to the casebook in 2018-19.

It (or something substantially similar) was in 9 or 10 for many years before that (it may have been removed for a year or two and then re-appeared in rule 8).