Time Back on Clock

[golfdesigner]

Had this one today--
Correctable Error
19.6 seconds on clock in OT A leading by 4
A1 is fouled
tell players 1+1 [table did not tell us that we were in double bonus]
A1 misses shot A2 rebounds miss at FT line extended -- table blows horn at 16.5-sec and says should have been 2 shots.
Tell coach we have a correctable error for not awarding the second FT
B coach insists that we should put clock back to 19.6 seconds--
we get together and discuss and decide to line up players for second throw, leave the clock at 16.5 and play on after the FT.

Did we kick this one?

[Maverick]

Nope, exactly right. Since the ball was still in A's possision, line back up for the FT and play from there. Do not put the time back on the clock (4-10-5).

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by Maverick
Nope, exactly right. Since the ball was still in A's possision, line back up for the FT and play from there. Do not put the time back on the clock (4-10-5).

I'm not so sure. I know that the try for goal during the FT ended Team A's control. Is the subsequent rebound a new possession for Team A or is it necessary that Team B get the ball for a change of possession to occur?
If Team A to NO Team in control, then back to Team A, counts as a change, then we need to continue from the POI after administering the final merited FT. That would mean lane cleared for the last FT, then awarding a throw-in to A.
Either way, no time is put back on the clock.
I checked the case book and couldn't find anything conclusive.

[golfdesigner]

the miss by A1 was the free throw not a try for goal. The rebound to Team A was the rebound of the missed free throw attempt

I would appreciate any and all rule and case book references


[Edited by golfdesigner on Feb 13th, 2005 at 08:45 AM]

[BktBallRef]

You handled it correctly.

Time is not put back on the clock. Shoot the FT as Team A still has the ball. It's all in 2-10.

[Maverick]

Correct. I should have said "there hasn't been a change of possesion" instead of A still has possesion.

[LepTalBldgs]

Many times the rules make sense to me, but other times not. I'm trying to figure out a way to remember the ones that don't make sense, and this one doesn't.

Can you explain why you wouldn't put time back on the clock of we're going to shoot the second with players on the line. I understand that in citing 2-10 the rule says you shouldn't put time back on.

My question is why.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by LepTalBldgs
Many times the rules make sense to me, but other times not. I'm trying to figure out a way to remember the ones that don't make sense, and this one doesn't.

Can you explain why you wouldn't put time back on the clock of we're going to shoot the second with players on the line. I understand that in citing 2-10 the rule says you shouldn't put time back on.

My question is why.

You don't put time back on because you're not cancelling any action (scores,fouls,etc.) that might have occurred between the mistake and the time you correct it. You can't have it both ways. Make sense?

[SamIAm]

Why do you line the players up. Wouldn't you let A1 shoot the 2nd free throw then give the ball back to A who had rebounded the first missed free throw?

[Maverick]

Since the ball hadn't changed possesion, you just continue from the FT. If B had the ball at some point in there, you'd shoot the one FT with the lane clear then go back to the point of interruption. No real explaining it other than that is what is dictated by 2-10-6.

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by golfdesigner
the miss by A1 was the free throw not a try for goal. The rebound to Team A was the rebound of the missed free throw attempt

I'm fully aware that the missed shot and subsequent rebound were from a FT attempt. That is still a try for goal by definition.
RULE 4 - SECTION 20 FREE THROW
ART. 1 . . . A free throw is the opportunity given a player to score one point by an unhindered try for goal from within the free-throw semicircle and behind the free-throw line.

But anyway, it makes no difference whether the rebound came from a FT attempt of a field goal attempt, team control still ends when the try is clearly in flight. (4-12)

Is team possession and team control the same thing? Again, I'm not sure, but I don't think so. There is no team or player control during a throw-in, but the rules book does make a reference to a player in possession while attempting a throw-in.
Here is that reference:
9-2 Penalty #3, "If an opponent(s) of the thrower reaches through the throw-in boundary-line plane and touches or dislodges the ball while in possession of the thrower or being passed to a teammate outside the boundary line (as in 7-5-7), a technical foul shall be charged to the offender. No warning for delay required. See 10-3-11 Penalty.

Originally posted by Maverick
Since the ball hadn't changed possesion, you just continue from the FT. If B had the ball at some point in there, you'd shoot the one FT with the lane clear then go back to the point of interruption. No real explaining it other than that is what is dictated by 2-10-6.

Which brings me back to what I wrote earlier. I'm not sure that this interpretation by Maverick is correct. It could well be, but it's just not clear to me.

The applicable rule here, 2-10-6 says, "If an error is corrected, play shall be resumed from the point at which it was interrupted to rectify the error, unless it involves awarding a merited free throw(s) and there has been no change of team possession since the error was made, in which case play shall resume as after any free-throw attempt(s)."

Now what exactly does no change of team possession mean?
1. Does it mean that the other team must get the ball for there to be a "change"?
2. Or does Team A having control, then no team having control, and then back to Team A again constitute a "change"? (Examples of this would be: Team A attempts a try for goal and misses, but then gets the rebound, or if Team A has the ball, but Team B then deflects the ball OOB (or kicks it), so that the ball becomes dead, and now Team A inbounds it.)

While thinking about this please bear in mind the definition of rebounding, "SECTION 36 REBOUNDING
ART. 1 . . . Rebounding is an attempt by any player to secure possession of the ball following a try or tap for goal. In a rebounding situation there is no player or team control."


If the NFHS interprets this phrase to mean point #1, then the players should be occupying spots along the lane, and the game should continue from the result of the FT, but if in "change of team possession" they include point #2, then the lane should be clear for awarding of the final FT and the game should continue from the POI with a throw-in for Team A.

What it really boils down to is whether or not the status of NO POSSESSION by either team is considered a change from possession by Team A.
I just DON'T KNOW the NFHS thinking on this, and there is not a definition of "team possession" or "change of team possession" provided in the rules book.