Shoot 2 FT's or ball OOB's

[MJT]

Had a debate with my partner 2nt working a HS JV game. Here is the play. Player drives baseline and is about even with the glass. He is fouled as he starts to go up and the foul knocks him a little more behind the glass. I think to myself as I call the foul that he is going up to shoot, but after the whistle he decides he cannot get the shot off anymore so he looks and passes the ball towards a teammate at the elbow. He does all that while in the air. The ball was not knocked out of his hands, he definately passed it towards the elbow. I had the ball OOB's and at our 1/2 time we discussed it. I looked up the definition for shooting 4-40-1 and 4-40-2 and think I was correct.
My partner is convinced that since it looked like he was going to shoot when the foul occured, then he gets 2 FT's even if he decides to pass. Now if he never got the shot off at all, or if he tried, or kind of shot it towards the goal, then 2 FT's for sure. Need some opinions on this one.

Second question. I know this is a technicality, but I want to know how it works. If a player comes over to me as I am the trail official when his teammate is shooting the 1st of two FT's and says "if he makes the 2nd one, we want a TO" does he have to tell me after the 2nd make, or is his asking before the 2nd is ever attempted an allowable request. Like I said, I know it is technicality, I was going to give it to him, of course he missed, but I didn't know if by rule it was correct to do so. Can't really find it in the book.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by MJT
My partner is convinced that since it looked like he was going to shoot when the foul occured, then he gets 2 FT's even if he decides to pass. Now if he never got the shot off at all, or if he tried, or kind of shot it towards the goal, then 2 FT's for sure. Need some opinions on this one.

This is what we get paid the big bucks for -- judgment. If you think he was intending to shoot, and the foul made him change his mind, then he gets two shots. If you think he was intending to pass, it's oob. I personally decided a long time ago to always give the benefit of the doubt in these cases. If there's any chance the player was shooting, I call it a shooting foul. The other coach won't like it -- till it goes his way.

Originally posted by MJT
Second question. I know this is a technicality, but I want to know how it works. If a player comes over to me as I am the trail official when his teammate is shooting the 1st of two FT's and says "if he makes the 2nd one, we want a TO" does he have to tell me after the 2nd make, or is his asking before the 2nd is ever attempted an allowable request. Like I said, I know it is technicality, I was going to give it to him, of course he missed, but I didn't know if by rule it was correct to do so. Can't really find it in the book.

As soon as they tell you they're going to call it, you tell them to just stand there, and then as the ball is passing through the basket, you turn and glare at him, until he says the magic words. Because technically, yes, he needs to say it again. It's good to encourage them to play as close to the letter of the law as possible.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by rainmaker

This is what we get paid the big bucks for -- judgment. If you think he was intending to shoot, and the foul made him change his mind, then he gets two shots. If you think he was intending to pass, it's oob. I personally decided a long time ago to always give the benefit of the doubt in these cases. If there's any chance the player was shooting, I call it a shooting foul. The other coach won't like it -- till it goes his way.

On the other hand, it's hard to claim a pass is a shot.

If A1 drives towards the basket, is fouled and kicks the ball out I can't see myself giving him 2 shots. If he puts it up or is prevented from putting it up I can plead my case and send him to the line.

If he kicks it out...he aint going to the line.

Originally posted by MJT
Second question. I know this is a technicality, but I want to know how it works. If a player comes over to me as I am the trail official when his teammate is shooting the 1st of two FT's and says "if he makes the 2nd one, we want a TO" does he have to tell me after the 2nd make, or is his asking before the 2nd is ever attempted an allowable request. Like I said, I know it is technicality, I was going to give it to him, of course he missed, but I didn't know if by rule it was correct to do so. Can't really find it in the book.

As soon as they tell you they're going to call it, you tell them to just stand there, and then as the ball is passing through the basket, you turn and glare at him, until he says the magic words. Because technically, yes, he needs to say it again. It's good to encourage them to play as close to the letter of the law as possible. [/B][/QUOTE]

Uhhhmmmmm...well, yeah, sure, by the book and all but of course if the coach sez "Dan I want a timeout on the make" I'm not going to make him ask again. Same goes for a player on the floor.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

On the other hand, it's hard to claim a pass is a shot.

If A1 drives towards the basket, is fouled and kicks the ball out I can't see myself giving him 2 shots. If he puts it up or is prevented from putting it up I can plead my case and send him to the line.

If he kicks it out...he aint going to the line.

As soon as they tell you they're going to call it, you tell them to just stand there, and then as the ball is passing through the basket, you turn and glare at him, until he says the magic words. Because technically, yes, he needs to say it again. It's good to encourage them to play as close to the letter of the law as possible.

Uhhhmmmmm...well, yeah, sure, by the book and all but of course if the coach sez "Dan I want a timeout on the make" I'm not going to make him ask again. Same goes for a player on the floor.

[/B][/QUOTE]

Dan, buddy - gotta disagree with you on both counts. If the player is fouled after he "begins the continuous motion that usually leads to a shot" and he is fouled while still in that motion, he gets the shooting foul no matter what happens next, since the foul occurred during the shooting motion and that's the test for a shooting foul.

As to the timeout, I tell them to request it when they want it. What happens if the other team yells for a timeout as soon as the free throw goes through? Who gets charged with it if you don't make them request it at the proper time?

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Mark Padgett

Uhhhmmmmm...well, yeah, sure, by the book and all but of course if the coach sez "Dan I want a timeout on the make" I'm not going to make him ask again. Same goes for a player on the floor.

Dan, buddy - gotta disagree with you on both counts. If the player is fouled after he "begins the continuous motion that usually leads to a shot" and he is fouled while still in that motion, he gets the shooting foul no matter what happens next, since the foul occurred during the shooting motion.
[/quote][/b]

I don't know about you, but I consider "a continuous motion that leads to a pass" to be a pass.

Call me simple, but there it is.

As to the timeout, I tell them to request it when they want it. What happens if the other team yells for a timeout as soon as the free throw goes through? Who gets charged with it if you don't make them request it at the proper time?

Well then the other team gets the timeout.

Call me simple...

[MJT]

Mark Padgett
What about 4-40-2 which says "A player is trying for a goal when the player has the ball and in the officials judgement is throwing or attempting to throw for a goal. If he passes it, how can we say he is throwing it for a goal??? This is why I think if he passes it, he "passes" on his FT's as well.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Dan_ref


Call me simple, but there it is. ...

Call me simple...

Okay, Dan, you're....

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by rainmaker

Okay, Dan, you're....

Thanks!

http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/OCCAMRAZ.html

[golfdesigner]

Originally posted by MJT
Had a debate with my partner 2nt working a HS JV game. Here is the play. Player drives baseline and is about even with the glass. He is fouled as he starts to go up and the foul knocks him a little more behind the glass. I think to myself as I call the foul that he is going up to shoot, but after the whistle he decides he cannot get the shot off anymore so he looks and passes the ball towards a teammate at the elbow. He does all that while in the air. The ball was not knocked out of his hands, he definately passed it towards the elbow. I had the ball OOB's and at our 1/2 time we discussed it. I looked up the definition for shooting 4-40-1 and 4-40-2 and think I was correct.
My partner is convinced that since it looked like he was going to shoot when the foul occured, then he gets 2 FT's even if he decides to pass. Now if he never got the shot off at all, or if he tried, or kind of shot it towards the goal, then 2 FT's for sure. Need some opinions on this one.

Had this one last year soph prelim game...varsity officials watching..after game in locker room we asked V officials if they had any comments...only comment was related to this play..they asked why 2-shots...I said if not for the foul player would have shot...V comment was b4 deciding 2FT or OOB let play finish...if A1 passes off, then OOB...if A1 looks like trying shot attempt and foul stops A1 and he/she doesn't get shot off then 2FT..V officials said easier to justify 2FT if he doesn't actually get shot off because of foul than if he gets pass off...I guess I can understand this, and I am a little more patient on waiting out end of play B4 awarding 2FTs

Second question. I know this is a technicality, but I want to know how it works. If a player comes over to me as I am the trail official when his teammate is shooting the 1st of two FT's and says "if he makes the 2nd one, we want a TO" does he have to tell me after the 2nd make, or is his asking before the 2nd is ever attempted an allowable request. Like I said, I know it is technicality, I was going to give it to him, of course he missed, but I didn't know if by rule it was correct to do so. Can't really find it in the book.

I nod to player okay, then after FT, look at player and make sure he still wants TO, so player needs to signal or ask a second time, then I recognize TO request and grant it.

[Jimgolf]

Originally posted by golfdesigner
I nod to player okay, then after FT, look at player and make sure he still wants TO, so player needs to signal or ask a second time, then I recognize TO request and grant it.

I deal with younger kids, so maybe this is inappropriate for HS, but why not just say, "I'll look for your timeout signal after the shot"?

[Nu1]

Second question. I know this is a technicality, but I want to know how it works. If a player comes over to me as I am the trail official when his teammate is shooting the 1st of two FT's and says "if he makes the 2nd one, we want a TO" does he have to tell me after the 2nd make, or is his asking before the 2nd is ever attempted an allowable request. Like I said, I know it is technicality, I was going to give it to him, of course he missed, but I didn't know if by rule it was correct to do so. Can't really find it in the book.
--------------------------------------------------

This was brought up at our rules interpretation meeting. The point was made to tell them to ask you for the TO when they want it. Your example was given, among other examples, and we were told to say something like, "Okay. If he makes the 2nd one, I'll look at you and you tell me you want a TO." The interpretor's point was that anything could happen between the "first" request and the actual request.

I had another TO scenario in a scrimmage. Team A is bringing the ball up the floor - I'm Trail. As I pass B's bench, Coach B says, "When it's our ball I want a TO". Play continues, Team A scores...I turn to Coach B and say, "You want it?" He says yes and I blow the whistle.

[zebraman]

I'm with Rainmaker and Padgett on this one.

1) I have no problem telling the other coach, "he had started his shooting motion... he passed it after he got hammered, but his intent was to shoot."

2) "Yes, I'll be looking for your time-out after this free throw, but you still have to call it." Players and coaches sometimes change their minds and I'm not automatically giving them a time-out that they wanted 15 seconds ago.

Z

[Dan_ref]

I'm not going to change anyone's mind on either of these but that's OK. I'll leave it at this though:

In the first play I'm not so worried about what I tell the coaches. IMO if a player passes the ball out to the perimeter after being fouled on the way to the basket his intent was *clearly* to pass the ball out after getting the defense to collapse on him. (We might wonder why a foul was called at this point anyway but that's another thread.)

As for the timeout sitch - sure anything can happen between the early request & your granting the TO. But again *nothing* might happen as well and in my limited experience nothing is usually what does happen. If something happens - a T, a fight, an earthquake, a power outage, a tornadoe rips the roof off the building or a bird sitting in the rafters poops on the court then yeah, ask the coach if he still wants the timeout.

If nothing happens just ask if wants a 30 or a full & get on with it.

[bigwhistle]

I agree with Dan on both issues.....not that he cares

[Adam]

If a player is intending to shoot the ball, he's not going to pass it when he gets fouled. He's going to shoot the ball to try to get the three point play. I agree with Dan, if he proceeds to pass the ball, I doubt he was going to shoot anyway.