Had a situation today. Boys 16U, 4th-Q. Team A is fouled by B. Nonshooting foul. The table signals that team A is in the bonus (Mrs. Johnny's Mom is keeping the book), so we procede to the line and shoot 1 and 1 (made the first, missed the second). The next dead ball the table tells us that team A was, in fact, not in the bonus.
How is this handled?

Cancel the FT that A1 made. Give the ball to Team A at the designated spot nearest the foul.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by BktBallRef

Quote:

Cancel the FT that A1 made. Give the ball to Team A at the designated spot nearest the foul.

Thanks, but I am still a bit confused when it come to correctable errors. :(

Ok, I know that by rule we cancel the FT and award the ball to A.
However, if the first dead ball is a result of B being fouled in the act of shooting. Does B attempt the throws with an empty lane and then we give the ball back to A? Or do we cancel all the action to this point and give the ball back to A?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mike Burns

Quote:

Originally posted by BktBallRef Quote: Cancel the FT that A1 made. Give the ball to Team A at the designated spot nearest the foul. Thanks, but I am still a bit confused when it come to correctable errors. :( Ok, I know that by rule we cancel the FT and award the ball to A. However, if the first dead ball is a result of B being fouled in the act of shooting. Does B attempt the throws with an empty lane and then we give the ball back to A? Or do we cancel all the action to this point and give the ball back to A?

2-10-5 states, "Points scored, consumed time and additional activity, which may occur prior to the recognition of an error, shall not be nullified." Therefore, B1 shoots his FTs with no one on the lane and then A gets the ball back on the spot nearest the foul.

I hate these things! :)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by BktBallRef

Quote:

I hate these things! :)

AMEN!!!!!

I can see that the foul that occurred would still be in the book. But since the free throws did not yet occur, why do you shoot them? Failing to shoot the free throws does not nullify any activity which has occurred or any points scored.

I will take a shot at this! I know that I will be corrected if I'm wrong!(Don't have my books).

Player B1 is fouled in the act of shooting, I think this would be like continous motion! Yes the foul occured while he/she was shooting, he/she is entitled to complete the necessary course of action, prior to correcting the error!
My logic(not backed up by any casebook)

AK ref SE

You've already said why. Because the foul occurred. To not shoot the FTs would be to ignore the foul. The foul and the shots that are to follow must not be ignored.

I guess my point is that you are treating fouls differently than other violations in this correctable error scenario. In most cases, the first dead ball after the error occurs will be the result of a violation. Say A shot the free throws in error, B then gets ball and misses a shot, A brings ball up court and travels. At this point the error is noted and the correction made. Free throws erased and ball to A. We do not give the ball to B just because a traveling violation occurred. So it is not clear to me why we shoot free throws then give ball to A when a foul occurs, rather than just giving ball to A as we would with any other violation.

I think the most common situation for the ball to become dead after a correctable error is After a made basket at the other end. Ball is live goes through the basket ball is dead......

AK ref SE

Hawks Coach -

I see your point, but my feeling is that a foul IS DIFFERENT from any other violation, that's why the rules committee distinguishes between the two. As BktBallRef stated,

"To not shoot the FTs would be to ignore the foul. The foul and the shots that are to follow must not be ignored."

To not shoot the FTs in the case would be giving Team A a huge advantage. What if player B1 had not been fouled in the act of shooting and his basket scored. That would have created a deadball situation, the table could have notified the officials, and the ball could be given back to Team A at the spot of the foul.

That couldn't happen in this thread's scenario, because player B1 was FOULED IN THE ACT OF SHOOTING (read: he was put at a disadvantage by Team A) and his shot didn't go in. Not allowing Team B to shoot there freethrows would not only be the incorrect thing to do, according to the book, but it would also be unjust (i know the two don't always agree).

In closing, let me say this, THANK YOU for caring about the spirit and intent of the rules as much as you do. If more coaches cared as much as you seem to, the games would be much easier to officiate.

Jake

Coach-
I understand your reasoning behind this, but I have to agree with BktBallRef. Rule 2-10-6 states:
If an error is corrected, play shall be resumed from
the point at which it was interrupted to rectify the
error...
Thus, you would go back and nullify the free throws, and then resume play by awarding the free throws for the last foul. The ball would not go back to team A for an inbound based on the correction of the error. You would play the free throws as normal. I'm not sure if this makes sense?

Dave
This is not what bktballref has suggested. He says shoot the free throws, not as normal but with no one on lane, then give ball to A. I do recognize that fouls are different and am not arguing the call, just looking to see if there are rules or cases to back this call. I have seen justifications, but no facts. so my inquiry remains unanswered, other than to point out that fouls are different than other violations or dead ball situations.

COACH; I think what Dave was trying to say with this whole situation is this: If B1 is fouled in the act of shooting after the error was made. Then you go back and take away the free throw basket by A1 that wasn't entitled. Then you go back to where the play left off with the foul shots by B1, with players on the lane spots. Play will be continued from that time on. The rule states that you continue where the play left off after the correctable error is taken care of.

Why can't we have more coaches like Hawks Coach. I applaud your willingness to discuss issues. I like looking at your responses, It gives me the coaches thought process.

AK ref SE