Horn on FT - delayed violation?

bgtg19 · #1 (**permalink**) Thu Jan 20, 2005, 09:06am

The other thread ("New Interpretation") reminds me of a discussion we had in our area. This is the scenario. A1 is at the FT line to shoot one shot after a made basket and foul. After the ball is in A1's hands, the horn sounds as B6 reports to the scorer's table. Seeing that A1 is disconcerted by the horn, the lead steps into the lane to take back the ball, reset, and start the FT process again. B1, seeing the lead official stepping into the lane and knowing/thinking that B6 is reporting to replace him, leaves his assigned spot in the lane and heads toward the bench. When B1 leaves, the ball is still in A1's hands. Official then takes the ball from A1, tells B1 he must stay in the game and get back in his assigned lane position. A's coach gets up hollering to get the officials' attention. Lead official goes to A's bench and explains to coach that because the horn disconcerted his shooter, he's resetting the FT. Team A's coach insists that it is fine with him, BUT that because B1 stepped into the lane while A1 had the ball, it is a violation (coach didn't say delayed violation, but you can't expect coaches to be precise....). As a resut, says Team A's coach, A1 should get his FT attempt and, if he misses, he should get another. Lead official says "We're not doing that coach. I stepped in to reset and we're resetting and playing on."

How do you think the rules apply to this particular situation?

(By the way, the main "teaching point" we seemed to agree on in our discussion was that if you are going to step in and reset any FT situation, always blow your whistle first. That way, there won't/shouldn't be arguments about actions after the whistle blows.)

johnnyrao · #2 (**permalink**) Thu Jan 20, 2005, 09:47am

In my opinion the officials are correct in ignoring Coach A's pleas for a violation. A1 gets a new free throw and the violation by B1 is ignored. I would say the rule behind it is that a free throw ends when the ball becomes dead. When A1 gave the ball back to the official the ball became dead and that free throw (and all related activity to include the violation) also ended; thus, the next free throw is a totally new one. I agree the whistle should blow to be IAW the rule book and officially make the ball dead, but it is dead when the official takes it back. Also, since the ball is back in the official's hand why can't B6 enter the game? I would have allowed B6 to enter and replace B1 too.

This is similar to a discussion we had this year. A1 has a free throw. B1 violates before the shot and you signal with a closed fist. A calls a time-out before A1's shot. Does the violation carry over? The answer we came up with is no because the TO caused the ball to become dead and the free throw ends on a dead ball so after the TO the free throw by A1 is a new one and the violation does not carry over.

bob jenkins · #3 (**permalink**) Thu Jan 20, 2005, 09:54am

Quote:

Originally posted by johnnyrao

This is similar to a discussion we had this year. A1 has a free throw. B1 violates before the shot and you signal with a closed fist. A calls a time-out before A1's shot. Does the violation carry over? The answer we came up with is no because the TO caused the ball to become dead and the free throw ends on a dead ball so after the TO the free throw by A1 is a new one and the violation does not carry over.

The violation carries over. I think the most recent NCAA bulletin contains this play.

johnnyrao · #4 (**permalink**) Thu Jan 20, 2005, 10:04am

Bob,

I posted this on the "New Interpretation" discussion also. This discussion we had resulted from the state certification test that had a similar question. I didn't take the test because I haven't been here long enough but those that did were discussing this question and said the answer was "no, the violation does not carry over" because of what I said above. I am going to re-address it with our association so we make sure we have it right if it happens. Luckily this doesn't happen too often.

rainmaker · #5 (**permalink**) Thu Jan 20, 2005, 11:31am

The point to the extra shot if the shooter misses is to give the shooter an uninterrupted chance. The ref did that by taking back the ball and starting over. The horn is what caused the problem, not the player stepping in, and there is no penalty for table people screwing up.

BktBallRef · #6 (**permalink**) Thu Jan 20, 2005, 11:49am

Quote:

Originally posted by johnnyrao
Bob,

I posted this on the "New Interpretation" discussion also. This discussion we had resulted from the state certification test that had a similar question. I didn't take the test because I haven't been here long enough but those that did were discussing this question and said the answer was "no, the violation does not carry over" because of what I said above. I am going to re-address it with our association so we make sure we have it right if it happens. Luckily this doesn't happen too often.

"Those that did were discussing this question" are wrong. The fact that Team A used a FT does not void the violation.

bgtg19 · #7 (**permalink**) Thu Jan 20, 2005, 12:42pm

Quote:

Originally posted by rainmaker
The point to the extra shot if the shooter misses is to give the shooter an uninterrupted chance. The ref did that by taking back the ball and starting over. The horn is what caused the problem, not the player stepping in, and there is no penalty for table people screwing up.

Yes, but a delayed violation carries over when a time out is called and, after a TO, a shooter has an uninterrupted chance to make a FT....

And while there is not a "penalty for table people screwing up" there *are* penalties for players screwing up. For example, A1 is dribbling the ball when horn accidentally goes off. A1 stops her dribble when she hears the horn. The officials never recognize the horn and the ball remains live. When A1 begins dribbling again, realizing that play is not being stopped, she has committed an illegal dribble.

rainmaker · #8 (**permalink**) Thu Jan 20, 2005, 04:17pm

Quote:

Originally posted by bgtg19
The other thread ("New Interpretation") reminds me of a discussion we had in our area. This is the scenario. A1 is at the FT line to shoot one shot after a made basket and foul. After the ball is in A1's hands, the horn sounds as B6 reports to the scorer's table. Seeing that A1 is disconcerted by the horn, the lead steps into the lane to take back the ball, reset, and start the FT process again.

At this point where the lead stepped in, the FT is ended. The lead should have blown the whistle but didn't. Call it an "inadvertant no-call" So when B1 steps out of his spot, it's not a violation, because the FT had already ended. Therefore there is no reason to give the original shot plus a replacement shot if the first one is not made. Whatever happens next, the next shot opportunity is already the replacement.

I think this is the only reasonable interp of what happened. The horn shouldn't have sounded, the whistle should have blown, but these are official's errors and should not be held against players.