Fouled in the act of 'shooting'

[WooPigSooie]

For a change, I actually watched a small school high school playoff basketball game FROM THE STANDS. Waahooo.

Anyway, to my comment/question. At the end of the game, Team A is behind by 3 pts and is inbounding the ball in their backcourt with approximately 8 seconds left. Team B has only committed 4 team fouls in the second half. As we have all seen before, since Team B has fouls to give, they choose to start fouling as soon as the inbound pass goes in to keep Team A from having a full 8 seconds to get somebody open for the a three.

Team B applies pressure in the backcourt.

*Inbound pass 1- TWEET immediate foul. 5 team fouls.

On inbound pass two, the recipient of the pass is able to get away from the backcourt pressure slightly. Knowing that the foul is coming, the Team A's player gets off an akward, from the hip shot and shoots it about 3/4 court. Definately contact. The official blows the whistle and calls a foul in the act of shooting, giving Team A 3 possible game tying freethrows. It turned out the player missed 2 of 3 and Team B won the game despite the call.

I admire the decisiveness of the official, but, man, that took some guts to call that and put the player on the line with a chance to tie the game. Have any of you experienced a call like this? How quick would some of you be to call a foul in this exact situation? Is there a common sense component to calling a foul in the act of shooting, such as in this case? The shot was obviously not designed to be a legitimate try for goal.

Of course, the gym went crazy over the call. Alot of what I was hearing from the Team B's fans was how does the official know that the player was not trying to attempt a long pass to teammates who were assembling in the frontcourt.

I am interested in some opinions on this situation.

[Dribble]

Personally, I just go with a non-shooting foul, OOB for Team A at the point nearest the foul. If there's only 1 or 2 seconds on the clock and it's a desperation 3-pt. attempt with the same contact, then yes...free throws are probably warranted for even touching the player!

[Adam]

If he was trying to shoot, good on him. He's getting some free throws. As for the question of how I know he's not trying to pass, that's not the point. When a player looks like he's shooting and gets fouled, we assume it's a shot. You could ask the same question about any player who gets fouled while attempting a shot from outside 10 feet.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Dribble
Personally, I just go with a non-shooting foul, OOB for Team A at the point nearest the foul. If there's only 1 or 2 seconds on the clock and it's a desperation 3-pt. attempt with the same contact, then yes...free throws are probably warranted for even touching the player!

Are you serious?

A foul in the act of shooting with 7 seconds to go is not a shooting foul, but if the exact same play occurred with 2 seconds to go, it IS a shooting foul.

That's kind of a.....different..... philosophy.

[cowbyfan1]

I had a tie game (during my last game of the season) and the home team trying to make winning basket with only a couple second left. Shooter gets slapped on the forearm with about .2 seconds left while going up for a layup. Horn is sounding as I am blowing my whistle. Send him to line. 2 shots, missed both. Home team missed something like 10 free throws in a row at end of game. They ended up winning by 6 in OT tho. All this after being up by about 18 at the half.

[ronny mulkey]

Originally posted by Dribble
Personally, I just go with a non-shooting foul, OOB for Team A at the point nearest the foul. If there's only 1 or 2 seconds on the clock and it's a desperation 3-pt. attempt with the same contact, then yes...free throws are probably warranted for even touching the player!

Double,

Is that smilie face at the end of your answer mean that your post is made tongue-in-cheek? If not, please explain your viewpoint a little bit more, please.

Mulk

[truerookie]

I admire the decisiveness of the official, but, man, that took some guts to call that and put the player on the line with a chance to tie the game. Have any of you experienced a call like this?


This type of call is what seperates Referees from Umpires.