The play wasn't difficult, but I had to pause for a second and get with my partner.

Team A shooting second (of 2 or 1 and 1; don't recall) free throws. B41 steps into lane early and I (as the lead) have delayed dead ball signal. Free throw does not touch rim prompting my partner to call a violation (his whistle was before mine).

So, we get together and I ask if we had a held ball for simultaneous violations, but then realized it wasn't a simultaneous violation -- Team B committed a violation first; only the dead ball part was simultaneous. We reshoot the second shot.

Its just weird that I've never seen this before or given it any thought. That's why I'm posting it here.

Read rule 9-1-10 (Penalities 4b) and see if you think you should have shot the free throw over again.

Z

Based on my interpretation of that rule zebraman, the replay shot should not have been done and team B should have gotten the ball for throw-in?

casebook 9.1.6 A (b)..is similar, but the free trow shooter steps on the free throw line while releasing the throw. Ruling is double violation..go to AP

and, being born in New Jersey, we call it a "trow"

Since you referred to your partner as a partner verses partners....why would both of you blow the whistle? It's the trail's call.

I don't have my books to read the rule but when B1 comes in the lane early, you would "fist straight out" and when/if A1 misses his free throw, you give him another try.

My interpretation of the rule is double violation, whistled at the point the shooting team violates. Go to AP rule.

NCAA rule 9-2 Art. 3 A.R. 7

It is a double violation unless you rule that B coming in early disconcerted the shooter.

I agree, another free throw should have been given due to the lane violation.

Why not?

4. If there is a violation first by the free-thrower's opponent followed by the free thrower or a teammate:

a. If both offenders are in a marked lane-space, the second violation is ignored, as in penalty item (2).

b. If the second violation is by the free thrower or a teammate behind the free-throw line extended and the three-point line, both violations are penalized, as in penalty item (3).

c. If a violation by the free thrower follows disconcertion by an opponent, a substitute free throw shall be awarded.

d. If a fake by an opponent causes the free thrower or a teammate of the free thrower to violate, only the fake is penalized.

That's wrong.

If there are two (non-simultaneous) LANE violations (i.e., 9-1-6, 9-1-7), then only penalize the first.

If there's a LANE violation followed by a different FT violation (person behind the three-point line enters early, thrower over the line, thrower misses the rim), then penalize them both (unless you think the second was due to disconcertion).

thanks for correcting me, but if the person clearly steps in the lane, before the ball is released, you are saying its a double violation? If so, I was wrong. BTW, dont blunt with your answers. SMILE!!!!!

What you're saying is correct in another stitch but not in this one. He said B41 entered the lane early then the freethrower air-balled it. The official has already held up his signal for the kid coming in early so why would you not give the shooter another try after the disconcertion?

See above....it's the trail's call in 2-man. Lead is watching rebounding. Trail is also but he has the angle to see the rim.

It depends on where B41 was. Correct me if I'm wrong but lead has the two players in the lowest blocks and the opposite lane. Trail has the other player(s) in the lane opposite him/her and the players above the three point arc.

What he said.

There is no rebounding while the L is watching for a lane violation. And when there is rebounding it's pretty much guaranteed to happen where the L is already looking.

That's exactly what I'm saying -- it's a double violation, unless you judge that there was disconcertion.

As I've said before, if you judge that there was disconcertion, then award another try. There's no mention of that in the posted play, however.

There is 2 different comments going on here. One is about the lane violation/disconcertion and the other is about who blows the whistle on an airball freethrow. The airball freethrow is the trail's call.

Trail has the missed rim and lead has the delayed violation...when the shot was missed there would be two whistles...

>>casebook 9.1.6 A (b)..is similar, but the free trow shooter steps on the free throw line while releasing the throw. Ruling is double violation..go to AP<<

This seems inconsistent with CB 9.1.9 Situation B (b) where B1 was in the lane and A2 committed basket interference. According to the ruling, A1 is giving a "substitute throw", which is how we did it.

This needs further clarification, because I agree that the first case play indicates it should be AP, but the one I posted here indicates the A violation is ignored.

Incidentally, other than in passing, ignore disconcertion. We didn't have that.

The difference is who made the violation...if the second violation occurs by the offense from one of the lane spaces then you give the shooter a second free throw...if the violation occurs anywhere else on the court it's a double violation (unless you believe that the first violation caused the second)

I'm with you there.

If there is a violation first by the free-thrower's opponent followed by the free thrower or a teammate:

a. If both offenders are in a marked lane-space, the second violation is ignored, as in penalty item (2).
b. If the second violation is by the free thrower or a teammate behind the free-throw line extended and the three-point line, both violations are penalized, as in penalty item (3).
c. If a violation by the free thrower follows disconcertion by an opponent, a substitute free throw shall be awarded.
d. If a fake by an opponent causes a teammate of the free thrower to violate, only the fake is penalized.

Joseph, that's not correct. The difference between Aggie's play and the case play is not who made the violation; but rather, the kind of violation. In Aggie's play, both violations are free throw violations. But in the case play, one of the violations is basket interference, which is not a free throw violation. So A2's BI merely ends the FT; and since we had a delayed violation for B1, a replacement throw is awarded.

Chuck and joseph: I don't see support for your interpretations in the rules, so please advise. The CB play ruling doesn't specify a distinction between Type 1/2 and Type 3 violations. Without more, I can't assume that the intent of play interp was to differentiate between violation types.

I believe the intent of the three types of violations is to separate out two things: immediate dead ball vs. delayed dead ball, and violations that end up with points scored. Type I = immediate dead ball; Type II = immediate dead ball; scoring possible; Type III = delayed dead ball possible (not to mention ignoring violation possible). I don't think this has anything to do with the play at hand.

Aggie, Bob Jenkins spelled it out pretty clearly on page 1 of this thread. Here are the possibilities:

1) Free throw violations (listed in 9-1) are committed by opponents and both opponents occupy a lane space along the lane line.

2) Free throw violations are committed by opponents and one or both opponents do NOT occupy a lane space.

3) Violations are committed by opponents during the FT, but one of the violations is NOT a free throw violation.

In (1), only the first violation is penalized. So if the first violation is by the shooting team, the ball is dead immediately and no points are scored. If the first violation is by the defensive team, then we have a delayed violation and if the FT misses, we give a replacement throw.

In (2), a double violation has occured. If it is during the first of a multiple throw, no point can be scored and play is continued with the next FT. If it is during the last of a multiple throw (or during the first of a 1-and-1), then no point can be scored and play is resumed with an alternating possession throw-in.

In (3), each violation would be penalized. In the case play that was cited, the defensive free throw violation is penalized with the delayed whistle. If the FT misses, a substitute throw will be awarded. When A2 commits BI, it ends the throw-in. It is penalized by causing the ball to become dead. But since the FT was not scored, we still have to award A1 a substitue FT.

That's very long-winded, but I hope it clears up the confusion.

In 9.1.9Bb, the violation by A2 is most certainly NOT ignored. If the FT had gone in, A2's contact would have canceled the score. However, since B1 also violated it must also be penalized....substitute throw.

This is not unlike a player getting fouled while shooting and then having goaltending or basket interferenece on the shot. The points will be awarded or canceled depending on who committed the GT or BI. Also, the shooter will get 1 shot if the points were awarded or two if canceled.

Can't remember if I saw this play cited in the previous posts so here goes...

6.4.3 Situation B: B1, in a marked lane space, enters the lane prematurely. The administering official properly signals the violation and A1 attempts the free throw. However, A1's attempt does not enter the basket or touch the ring. RULING: The violations by B1 and A1 constitute a simultaneous free-throw violation. Unless another free throw follows, play resumes with an alternating possession throw in from a designated spot outside the end line.

Ignore my last post. Its crystal clear now.

I'm not sure why I was reading 4(B), but in effect, not reading it. I was focusing on the basket interference aspect of the CB play, I guess, and not on the player who committed it.

Upon further review, we ruled there was disconcertion </wink>.