Was I dreaming?

[bigwhistle]

Somewhere in the last 2-3 months I seem to recall that an interpretation of 8-1-3 came out stating that the maximum two offensive players along the lane are frozen in the second spot. Other people are saying that they can slide up to the 3rd spot if the defense does not want the spot.

Was I just overdosing on rules interps and misread something, or are the offensive players restricted to only the 2nd space?

[caref]

is saying that they are open if the team that is designated for the does not take them. I am a little confused too and have been trying to find a definite interpretation.

I have friends who coach ask me about it and I tell them I am trying to find out for sure.

Anyone know for sure?

[Barry C. Morris]

The offensive players can have either the 2nd or 3rd place. No one can occupy the fourth slot and (of course) only the defense can occupy the block.

A maximum of two offensive players (other than the shooter) or four defensive players are allowed in marked lane spaces.

[Mregor]

Bigwhistle,

I thought the same thing until I got my '03 rule book. There is no change in movement. Per 9-1-3a, players can occupy a vacant space.

Mregor

[mick]

http://www.nfhs.org/Sports/basketball_emphasis.htm

3. Free Throw Administration

Over the years, the rules committee has been concerned with the increase in rough play during free throws. There have been many rules changes and Points of Emphasis in recent years to address these concerns. In 1997, the committee returned to the restrictions on lane-line players to be in effect until the ball hit the rim or backboard. This change has greatly reduced rough play. In an attempt to further reduce rough play and have the defense regain some of the advantage they may have lost when the “rim” restriction was reinstated, the number of players permitted in the marked lane spaces has been reduced. In addition to this year’s rule change, the following items are to be emphasized during free throws:

A. Lane-Space Requirements: The first two lane spaces adjacent to the end line must be occupied by the opponents of the free thrower. If the offense desires the second spaces, they may have them. If the defense desires the third spaces, they may have them. If a player entitled to the second or third space does not occupy that space, an opponent may be in the space (within the number limitations, four defense and two offense). The fourth marked lane spaces (nearest the free-throw shooter) may not be occupied. All officials are responsible for ensuring players are in their proper spaces. The administering official (Lead) should check each space for proper alignment before bouncing the ball to the shooter. If these requirements are not met, see 9-1-9 Penalty.

B. Double Violation: If the offense is erroneously permitted to occupy the first two lane spaces and the defense is erroneously permitted to occupy the second two lane spaces, a double violation shall be called (9-1-2 Pen 3).

C. Disconcertion: Disconcerting the free-throw shooter is a violation (9-1-5). Officials should pay particular attention to situations in which the free throw will become dead (first of two or first two of three). Defensive players frequently employ tactics which serve no other purpose than to disconcert the shooter (instructing players to box out, waving arms, etc.). With the spaces closest to the shooter remaining vacant, disconcertion should be minimized.

[nine01c]

Originally posted by mick

B. Double Violation: If the offense is erroneously permitted to occupy the first two lane spaces and the defense is erroneously permitted to occupy the second two lane spaces, a double violation shall be called (9-1-2 Pen 3).

Isn't B poorly worded? Although correct, wouldn't it be a double violation for offense to occupy the first lane spaces
regardless of what the defense does (occupies the second spaces, or no spaces at all)? (Actually, there are four violations)

[mick]

Originally posted by nine01c

Isn't B poorly worded? Although correct, wouldn't it be a double violation for offense to occupy the first lane spaces
regardless of what the defense does (occupies the second spaces, or no spaces at all)? (Actually, there are four violations)

nine01c,
If both teams spaces are not filled properly (that's: this one, or that one, or both of 'em) the rule will fit.
Seems okeedokee.
mick

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by nine01c


Isn't B poorly worded? Although correct, wouldn't it be a double violation for offense to occupy the first lane spaces
regardless of what the defense does (occupies the second spaces, or no spaces at all)? (Actually, there are four violations)

It's just addressing what usually happens. When A is mistakenly in the first space, B is usually in the second. But you are correct that just the fact that A is in the first spot creates a double violation.

[Adam]

Hmmm. I'm thinking that if I'm the defensive players in the first of two-shots, I might just sit in that second spot until I'm told otherwise. Try and get that double-violation to cancel the first shot.
Seems to me the rules should make an exception here and call for a re-shoot on this.

[mick]

Originally posted by Snaqwells
Hmmm. I'm thinking that if I'm the defensive players in the first of two-shots, I might just sit in that second spot until I'm told otherwise. Try and get that double-violation to cancel the first shot.
Seems to me the rules should make an exception here and call for a re-shoot on this.

Seems to me that a blind official may allow it.

[zebracz]

[i] ...I might just sit in that second spot until I'm told otherwise. Try and get that double-violation to cancel the first shot.
Seems to me the rules should make an exception here and call for a re-shoot on this. [/B]

Actually, if I'm considering this correctly, it is impossible for B to avoid the double-violation; NFHS, 9-1-2 forbids this B team to occupy an other spot the the 1st marked lane space (p54), so we use Pen. 3 & 4a and b (p55). these are just a little tricky, but reading thoroughly thru them, we can remember in the crunch. Then see rule 8-1-3 (4 a refresh).

Thx, Mick, for the mini-refresher course.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by zebracz

if I'm considering this correctly, it is impossible for B to avoid the double-violation; NFHS, 9-1-2 forbids this B team to occupy an other spot the the 1st marked lane space (p54), [/B]

True, but it's only a double violation if a player from Team A does occupy the first space. If the first lane space is simply left unoccupied, then the only violation is on Team B.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
True, but it's only a double violation if a player from Team A does occupy the first space. If the first lane space is simply left unoccupied, then the only violation is on Team B.

If B refuses to go in the first space, it's a T.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

If B refuses to go in the first space, it's a T.

Sorry. I was still thinking about the RPP after a TO.

[nine01c]

Originally posted by bob jenkins
If B refuses to go in the first space, it's a T.

Unless it is after a time-out or intermission and the resumption-of-play proceedure is in effect.