Dealing with the failure to award a merited free throw, what event separates the official's decision of having the game continued with either the lane filled and the resulting rebound/made free throw endline throw-in, or the lane not filled and a throw-in at the spot where the game was interrupted?

In the case where there is not just one event (possibly by conflicting rules and/or cases), please list the events and the supporting rules and/or cases.

NCAA rules:

Continue with the lane filled if there's been no change of possession. Otherwise shoot the FT(s) with the lane cleared and continue from PoI. This is Rule 2-11.4.

So if A1 is fouled and does not get a merited FT and the error is identified within the proper time, continue with the lane filled if only A has had possession since the foul.

Seems simple enough to me. What's the subtlety that you're thinking of?

In NFHS, if the error was caught in time, the error can be corrected. As said earlier, if there has been no change in possession when the error is caught then the lane is filled and play continues from that point. However, if A1 shoots and misses, B1 rebounds and A1 steals, and then the horn blows and the error is caught, the lane would be empty to shoot the foul shots and the ball would be inbounded by A because that is the POI.

Define a change of possession.

Here's the sitch:

T calls a hold on B1. A1 should have had the 1+1, but a throw-in was awarded instead. A sets up the half-court offense, and after a rebound, knocks the ball OOB.

Let's say the error is discovered. The lane is filled.

Let's say the official signals in B's direction. What happens to the lane?

Let's say B4 now has the ball OOB for their throw-in. :)

I'm guessing that the definition of COP is that B has the ball, and does not include only that the official has ruled that B gets possession.

(1)Sometime during the period beginning when A is not awarded the FT and ending when the error is discovered, B has TC of the ball

-or-

(2) It will be B's ball after the dead ball period in which the error is discovered.

So, by (2), the officials (who shall remain nameless :D) should have cleared the lane and continued with POI.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JugglingReferee

Quote:

T calls a hold on B1. A1 should have had the 1+1, but a throw-in was awarded instead. A sets up the half-court offense, and after a rebound, knocks the ball OOB. [T]he officials [...] should have cleared the lane and continued with POI.

IMHO, yes.

An interesting question just occurred to me. Suppose we have the same basic situation, where B1 fouls A1 with A in the bonus, but A is awarded the ball out of bounds. A2 takes a shot and misses and A3 gets the rebound. At this point the error is discovered.

Has there been a change in possession? On the one hand, B never gained possession, so it's tempting to say no. On the other hand, A gave up possession when A2 takes his/her shot, so it's tempting to say yes.

Since "possession" is not defined in Rule 4, it's hard to say which wins.

Well, reading from the Book of Bob, a change of possession is:

"Sometime during the period beginning when A is not awarded the FT and ending when the error is discovered, B has TC of the ball"

So, by that standard . . .

But it sure looks like you have a good tehnical point. Is it Nevada-worthy?

In my sitch, the official had signalled that is was B's ball. B had not yet received the ball OOB, but everyone had been informed what was going to happen.

Then we realized the error. Both of us thought that until B actually had the ball (ie. possession), it has not qualified as a COP.

Does B having the ball OOB qualify as a COP?

Yes, imo. See 2.10.1A (last year's reference). If "getting the ball" because of the posession arrow qualifies as COP, then "getting the ball" becuase of an OOB violation (or other) should also qualify.

Agreed. I guess I incorrectly assigned possession to mean live ball control.

Thanks.

Whenever B has earned the ball through a foul, violation, steal, or rebound, they have possession. They have earned the possession the moment of the foul, violation, rebound or steal...even if the throwin (for the violation or foul) has not even begun. After that point, the merited FTs should be shot with the lane cleared.

So you'd say it isn't when they receive the ball for the throw-in, but when the violation is committed?

Going back to my example for a moment, if you consider a change of possession to occur when team A loses possession rather than when team B gains possession, the idea that an OOB violation by A constitutes a change in possession for the purposes of a correctable error makes sense.

Yes.

The event I originally asked for is A causing a violation or foul, or B securing team control, or a B arrow and a held ball is called.

Well, 4-36-2(b), of the 4-36 Point of Interruption 4-36's, says play shall be resumed by " ... a free throw or throw-in when the stoppage occurred during this activity or if a team is entitled to such."

'Entitled to such' happens when the ball goes out of bounds, no? I find it handy to think of this as the 'pending or underway' clause.

Is a missed shot recovered by the shooting team the same thing as a change of possession for the purpose of 2-10-6?

2-10-6 references 'team possession', but that's not a defined term in FED rules as best I can tell. It appears neither in Rule 4 as having a definition of its own, nor in 4-2 (Alternating Possession and Arrow), nor in 6-4 (Alternating Possession).

If one thinks that the rules makers meant 'team possession' in 2-10-6 as synonymous with 'team control' . . . but that seems unlikely, since they carefully eschew the term elswhere.

On the basis that 2-6-10 doesn't say 'team control'. I would treat Team A shooting and rebounding the shot as one, continuous possession for the purpose of applying the rule.

Agreed.

[Edited by JugglingReferee on Feb 7th, 2006 at 02:01 AM]

Yes...B has earned the ball by forcing A to commit a violation. We'll correct the merited FTs but B still earned the ball. To put them on the lane makes them have to earn it again.

As would I. If we didn't consider the possible results...

<LI>A2 fouled...Error made (merited FTs not awarded)
<LI>A gets ball for throwin
<LI>A throws it in
<LI>A1 shoots...misses...shoots...misses
<LI>B deflects rebound OOB (never had control)
<LI>Error discovered
<LI>If you consider the rebound a possession change, you would give A2 the merited FT and give A the ball back no matter what. Of course, that is not how it is...FTs are shot with players on lane and play from there.

Only when B earns the ball through a foul, violation, or made basket by A, or by gaining team control do they gain possession.

Do you mean that the circumstances you list are in addition to the simple case of Team A shoots and rebounds its own miss?

I'll consider that a compliment of my overanalysis. :D Naturally, I have considered this point in the past, about three years ago in fact.

I concluded the same as Bob J. Intervening dead ball periods and other spans of time in which neither team is in control, do not constitute a change of team possession for correctable error purposes. (So Bob's definition of change of team possession is simple and good.)

I decided this because of the ruling in case book play 2.10.1 Situation A part (a).

[Also, I'll note that by specific wording of the latter part of 2-10-6, the awarding of merited a FT(s) without-a-change case is actually NOT a POI situation. So the new POI rule doesn't come into play and hence doesn't require a change in my past reasoning.

2-10-6 . . . If an error is corrected, play shall be resumed from the point of interruption to rectify the error, <font color = red>unless</font> 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).]

From part (a) of the following case book play we can conclude that the dead ball period during which the error is recognized doesn't count as the team losing possession even though neither team is in control during a dead ball by 4-12-6. Otherwise the ruling from the NFHS would be to resume with an AP throw-in for Team A.
From this I inferred that the NFHS did not intend periods of time during which neither team was in control to count as a "change". So although, the try for goal, miss, same team secures the rebound scenario is slightly different from the case play below because the period of no control is during a live ball, and really should have its own case book play, it has most of the same critical elements present and should, in my opinion, be ajudicated in the same manner. Therefore, I consider shoot, miss, same team rebounds, as not constituting a change of team possesssion FOR THE PURPOSE OF A CORRECTABLE ERROR.


2.10.1 SITUATION A: A1 is fouled but erroneously is not awarded two free throws even though the automatic bonus is in effect. Team A is given a throw-in, and A1 inbounds the ball to A2 who is tied up by B1 resulting in a held-ball situation. The error is discovered following the held-ball call. The possession arrow is pointing to: (a) A's; or (b) B's basket. RULING: In (a), the merited free throws will be awarded, and play will continue from that action, since Team A had not lost possession between the error and when the error was recognized. However, in (b), the lane is cleared for A1's merited free throws, and play resumes from the point of interruption which is an alternating-possession throw-in by Team B.