Free Throw Lane Violation???

[Jimgolf]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Perhaps the thinking is now that player (A1) is occupying a space/spot in the lane that an opponent can't get to without contact, and A1 got to that spot before the rules intended.

I was referring to the original post, where the girl fell into the lane with her hands, but got back to her feet. This is not the same as someone intentionally stepping into the lane early to get an advantage (and in fact she may be at a disadvantage because she may be too embarassed to go after the rebound), yet is penalized the same.

I also saw a game yesterday where the inbounds player stepped a little early onto the court when inbounding the ball after a made shot. Most of the times, especially in summer ball, this goes unnoticed, as the trail official is usually not paying too much attention, but this particular official was watching and called it.

In neither case does the offender gain an advantage if the violation is ignored, other than not being assessed the appropriate penalty. How is this different from 3-seconds, which is also usually "obvious"? (Thanks for your answer, Chuck)

The reason I mentioned the 3-seconds call was that someone had posted the other day that they haven't made a 3-seconds call since the 60's ( I think it was MTD, Sr.). Why is 3-seconds a judgment call and not inadvertant violation of the playing area?

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Jimgolf

I was referring to the original post, where the girl fell into the lane with her hands, but got back to her feet. This is not the same as someone intentionally stepping into the lane early to get an advantage (and in fact she may be at a disadvantage because she may be too embarassed to go after the rebound), yet is penalized the same.

On this play, the only concern, I think is disconcertion, as someone referred to earlier. By rule, if the shot goes, there must not have been disconcertion, so you don't call it. If the shot doesn't go, call it. The judgment of advantage/disadvantage is built right in.

[BillyMac]

Refering to the original post:

If this situation had happened in one of my games by a member of the defensive team, I know that I would have given the delayed violation signal and ignored the violation if the shot went in, or I would have called the violation if the shot missed (barring any other odd circumstances). If this act was by a member of the offensive team, I would have immediatley called a violation.

But after reading this thread I wasn't sure, according to the rules, why I would have called the play as I indicated above, that is, until I went to the rule book. I think that I, like many other posters to this thread, was concentrating too much on Rule 9 Section 1 Article 9, which deals with the foot moving or not moving over the vertical plane of the lane boundary.

Instead of concentrating on Article 9, check out Article 6 of the same rule and section, "No player shall enter or leave a marked lane space". In my opinion, in the original situation, the player has left the marked lane space by placing her hand in the lane.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Instead of concentrating on Article 9, check out Article 6 of the same rule and section, "No player shall enter or leave a marked lane space". In my opinion, in the original situation, the player has left the marked lane space by placing her hand in the lane.

Not in my opinion. Of course, our personal opinions don't really matter. We are talking about what the rules say.
The best rules support I can point to for those advocating a violation is the analogy to the throw-in. The thrower is not allowed to touch the inbounds part of the court. That is considered leaving the spot. Of course, the thrower IS allowed to break the plane, so the parallel is not perfect.

All that being said, according to how the current NFHS rules are written, touching the lane with your hand isn't a FT violation. I have said this on this very forum numerous times in the past. It could well be disconcertion, that is a judgment decision, but you can't just make up your own rules and call a violation here.

This play isn't new. It is just a quirk in the rules that has been pointed out before. If the NFHS wants to clean it up, they will.

[Nevadaref]

Now since we are adding to the case play list, how about the girls who stand in the bottom defensive space with their toe on the floor and heel up in the air extending OVER the 12' neutral zone block. Technically that IS a FT violation.