correctable error

[coldbears]

After buzzer 2d quarter tech on assistant coach. Ref adminsters two shots prior to leaving gym for half time.
They come back to start 2d half take away both points readminister shots and ball out of bounds. Since these free throws merited do they need to be reshot?

[BktBallRef]

There was no reason to re-shoot the FTs. The shots were merited. It's no different than a situation where a foul occurs that results in FTs, followed by a T. If the FTs are shot in the wrong order, it's of no consequence. Continue with the ball to the offended team.

[Nevadaref]

Shooting the free throws in the wrong quarter is not a correctable error. The timing of when the free throws are awarded is not important, only that they were awarded. The logic of this is backed by what Tony wrote above about shooting free throws in the wrong order. The FED has decided that free throws given at an incorrect time are not considered unmeritted.

It does make me think about the possession to start the 3rd Quarter, though.
If it had been done correctly, the offended team would receive the ball as part of the penalty on the T. But since the free throws were shot before the halftime intermission, and we know that no part of a penalty can carry over from one quarter to the next, I believe that the AP arrow now has to be used to start the 3rd Q.

The determining factor here is that you shot before the 10 minute intermission. The rules book tells us that this intermission takes place between halves (5-5-1), so because the free throws were shot before this intermission they clearly have to be considered part of the first half.
Hence, you are stuck going to the arrow to start the 2nd half.

[BoomerSooner]

As much as I would hate taking the ball from the offended team and going to the arrow, I have to agree with Nevedaref. I too think you must go to the arrow to start the second half. I'm trying to think of a way to avoid going to the arrow, but can't find anything within the context of the rules. My only question is what could the offended team have done to prevent shooting the FT's prior to the half. My guess is the refs thought they were in the right until the checked their books at intermission, so refusing to shoot could have caused some problems. Also as this isn't a correctable error using a TO probably wouldn't have done anything but cost you a TO.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
It does make me think about the possession to start the 3rd Quarter, though. If it had been done correctly, the offended team would receive the ball as part of the penalty on the T. But since the free throws were shot before the halftime intermission, and we know that no part of a penalty can carry over from one quarter to the next, I believe that the AP arrow now has to be used to start the 3rd Q.

Originally posted by Boomer
As much as I would hate taking the ball from the offended team and going to the arrow, I have to agree with Nevedaref. I too think you must go to the arrow to start the second half.

No way, guys. The penalty for a technical includes possession in the NFHS. You don't disregard that simply b/c the first part of the penalty was administered incorrectly.

You're not carrying the penalty from one period to the next. Once the horn sounded, the 2nd quarter was over. So no part of the penalty was administered in the 2nd quarter. The intermission is not the same as the 2nd quarter, so the T is considered to be part of the 3rd quarter. So you award possession to the offended team, w/o going to the arrow.

Use Tony's example. Say you have a shooting foul followed by a T. The official accidentally shoots the FTs for the T first. (College official who never studies rules differences ) When they realize that they messed it up, should they let the ball stay live after the FTs for the personal? No, you still award possession, b/c it's part of the penalty for the T; even tho they messed up the first part of the penalty.

As always, just my opinion.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

No way, guys. The penalty for a technical includes possession in the NFHS. You don't disregard that simply b/c the first part of the penalty was administered incorrectly.

You're not carrying the penalty from one period to the next. Once the horn sounded, the 2nd quarter was over. So no part of the penalty was administered in the 2nd quarter. The intermission is not the same as the 2nd quarter, so the T is considered to be part of the 3rd quarter. So you award possession to the offended team, w/o going to the arrow.

[/B][/QUOTE]Agree with Chuck. According to rule 5-6-3, the restriction mentioned by Nevada above that "no part of a penalty carries over from one quarter to the next" ONLY applies to fouls that occur before the timer can stop the clock and the period ends, or fouls that occur after time expires but the ball is still alive. Ergo, this article isn't pertinent or applicable at all in this particular case. R5-6-4 is the applicable rule. Under this rule, the officials may have screwed up part of the timing of the FT's by administering them early, but they don't have any rules justification to compound that error by changing the possession part of the technical foul penalty.

[Mark Dexter]

First off, is there a case play regarding the issue of shooting T FT's then bonus FT's (i.e., out of order) and not having to re-do them?

I agree with Chuck here. We're not splitting the penalty, and not having a part carry over from one period to the next. The free throws were shot early, but that doesn't mean that the offended team should be penalized by our mistake.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter
is there a case play regarding the issue of shooting T FT's then bonus FT's (i.e., out of order) and not having to re-do them?

I don't think so, Mark, but what would be the rule basis for re-shooting them? They weren't unmerited; they weren't shot by the wrong player. . . They were just shot in the wrong order.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

I don't think so, Mark, but what would be the rule basis for re-shooting them? They weren't unmerited; they weren't shot by the wrong player. . . They were just shot in the wrong order.

I don't think there's any basis for re-shooting them, either. I once made the argument of "unmerited free-throws" to do a re-shoot, but don't think that's right. Reason I ask is that I had a game last year where I made them re-shoot (caused a forfeit) and was just looking for a case play one way or the other.

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

I don't think so, Mark, but what would be the rule basis for re-shooting them? They weren't unmerited; they weren't shot by the wrong player. . . They were just shot in the wrong order.

Chuck, You're better than that! There certainly is a Case Book play on this. It is 8.7 Situation B.
Also notice that the 2nd Quarter will begin with the AP according to this casebook play. Of course, in this play the AP arrow would have been used even if the free throws had been shot in the correct order, since the T occurred before A1's free-throws were shot and that makes it part of the 1st Quarter.

8.7 sit B also shows that JR's statement is not quite right:

"According to rule 5-6-3, the restriction mentioned by Nevada above that "no part of a penalty carries over from one quarter to the next" ONLY applies to fouls that occur before the timer can stop the clock and the period ends, or fouls that occur after time expires but the ball is still alive."

In 8.7 we have a live ball personal foul as time expires. Then after time has expired in the quarter, there is a DEAD ball technical foul. We know it occurred during a dead ball because the play says it was intentional contact and it is ruled a T.
The last sentence of the ruling, then, correctly states that the AP will be used to start the second quarter, as the restriction does apply here.

Lastly, I agree that the 2nd Quarter ended with the sounding of the horn in the original play, but I cannot see considering the FTs to have been shot in the 2nd half due to the fact that they were attempted BEFORE the intermission was taken and by rule the intermission occurs BETWEEN THE HALVES. I do think that the officials mistake must cost the team a possession. Sadly.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
[/B]

Of course, in this play the AP arrow would have been used even if the free throws had been shot in the correct order, since the T occurred before A1's free-throws were shot and that makes it part of the 1st Quarter.

8.7 sit B also shows that JR's statement is not quite right:

"According to rule 5-6-3, the restriction mentioned by Nevada above that "no part of a penalty carries over from one quarter to the next" ONLY applies to fouls that occur before the timer can stop the clock and the period ends, or fouls that occur after time expires but the ball is still alive."

[/B][/QUOTE]Apples and oranges, Nevada. In the casebook play that you're citing above, you admit yourself that the T WAS part of the previous quarter. In the play that we're arguing, the T WASN'T part of the previous quarter. Your case book play isn't relevant, germane or applicable. Different rules apply because of the different circumstances.

Good try though.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Mar 16th, 2004 at 01:53 PM]

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Of course, in this play the AP arrow would have been used even if the free throws had been shot in the correct order, since the T occurred before A1's free-throws were shot and that makes it part of the 1st Quarter.

INSERT BREAK HERE!!!!!!

8.7 sit B also shows that JR's statement is not quite right:

"According to rule 5-6-3, the restriction mentioned by Nevada above that "no part of a penalty carries over from one quarter to the next" ONLY applies to fouls that occur before the timer can stop the clock and the period ends, or fouls that occur after time expires but the ball is still alive."

[/B]

Apples and oranges, Nevada. In the casebook play that you're citing above, you admit yourself that the T WAS part of the previous quarter. In the play that we're arguing, the T WASN'T part of the previous quarter. Your case book play isn't relevant, germane or applicable. Different rules apply because of the different circumstances.

Good try though.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Mar 16th, 2004 at 01:53 PM] [/B][/QUOTE]

You combined two portions of my post that were intended to be separate. I broke it apart for you.

I was only pointing out to you that there could be a DEAD ball foul AFTER TIME EXPIRES in a quarter and the restriction to not carry part of the penalty over to the next quarter would still apply. You left that case out of your original post, in which you were stating when the restriction applied.

You wrote:

"According to rule 5-6-3, the restriction mentioned by Nevada above that "no part of a penalty carries over from one quarter to the next" ONLY applies to fouls that occur before the timer can stop the clock and the period ends, or fouls that occur after time expires but the ball is still alive."
If we followed this then the officials would also award possession to the team offended by the T. That is not what is done.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Nevadaref


If it had been done correctly, the offended team would receive the ball as part of the penalty on the T. But since the free throws were shot before the halftime intermission, and we know that no part of a penalty can carry over from one quarter to the next, I believe that the AP arrow now has to be used to start the 3rd Q.

Back to your original post:

The FT's WERE shot AFTER the 2nd quarter ended. They were NOT shot as part of the 2nd. quarter. Ergo, rule 5-6-4 applies, even though the timing of shooting the FT's was screwed up. The FT's were justified, so there is no correctible error. You were trying to justify an AP by using rule 5-6-3, and that rule is NOT and never WAS applicable. It is NOT applicable because the T occurred AFTER the quarter ended, and it is NOT part of the "related activity" of the previous quarter.

[ChuckElias]

Nevada, without getting into your spat with JR , let me just say thanks for a case citation that shows that shooting in the wrong order does not qualify as a correctible error. I think that's the common sense answer, but you found it in black and white. Good catch.

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Back to your original post:

The FT's WERE shot AFTER the 2nd quarter ended. They were NOT shot as part of the 2nd. quarter. Ergo, rule 5-6-4 applies, even though the timing of shooting the FT's was screwed up. The FT's were justified, so there is no correctible error. You were trying to justify an AP by using rule 5-6-3, and that rule is NOT and never WAS applicable. It is NOT applicable because the T occurred AFTER the quarter ended, and it is NOT part of the "related activity" of the previous quarter.

I agree with almost all of this. I think the problem that we are looking at here is a de facto one. While we agree that the T took place after the 2nd quarter ended and the FTs should have been attempted as part of the 3rd quarter (5-6-4 as you cite), it appears from the situation that, IN FACT, they weren't.

I simply have a problem deciding in which quarter the FTs were ACTUALLY shot. We agree that the 2nd quarter has ended before they were shot, but since they were attempted before the halftime intermission, I just can't believe that they were part of the 3rd quarter. Based soley upon when the officials administered them, I would have to say that they took place in the 2nd quarter. The officials certainly treated it like that. Look at the last part of 5-6-4, "the free throws are attempted immediately, as if the foul had been part of the preceding quarter." This is what was done. Agreed?

This reasoning for excluding them from the 3rd quarter seems quite compelling to me. But so does the argument that they were shot after the 2nd quarter ended. So when the heck were they attempted????

Tell me if you think they were part of the 2nd or 3rd quarter. Please.
PS Chuck, I don't think this is a spat with JR, and you are quite welcome for the citation.