Free Throw Lane Violation???

[Rusty Gilbert]

Saw this recently and wondered what is the correct ruling:

Free throw attempt with lane spaces occupied. Player in bottom lane space leans over lane line getting ready for rebound when she loses her balance, tips forward, touches the lane with her hands, and then is able to regain her balance without ever breaking the vertical lane line plane with her foot. Refs blew whistle for violation of "coming into the lane too soon" (assume there was no disconcertion), awarded a repeat free throw (first one missed), and no one said a thing.

Someone sitting next to me stated (correctly) that rule 9 defining the free throw violation prohibits the "foot braking the plane" prior to the ball touching the rim but makes no reference to a person touching the free throw lane area prior to the free throw restrictions being removed.

Is touching the free throw lane area with one's hand in the above situation a free throw violation or not?

[Dan_ref]

Here's the ncaa rule 9-1-2h, similar to the HS rule I believe except the HS rule frees the players on the lane on the hit:

h. Players occupying any of the legal marked lane spaces on each side of the lane may break the vertical plane of a lane-space boundary once the free-thrower has released the ball.

I can't see a reference to a foot.

[Mark Padgett]

NF 9-1-9: "A player occupying a marked lane space may not have either foot beyond the vertical plane of the outside edge of any lane boundary..."

[BktBallRef]

While the rule says foot, if a player touches the lane with any part of his body, I have a violation. The foot is used because players are allowed to lean over the FT lane without penalty. Breaking the plane with the foot is the first "step" in entering the lane too soon. The NFHS was not invisioning such a scenario when they worded this rule. Yes, it's something that should be addressed by rule but until they do, a little common sense has to be used. Call it disconcertion if you like.

[Camron Rust]

A general principle is that a player is located where they are currently touching. If they're touching two areas, one takes precedent. If the player is touching the lane, they're located in the lane.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

While the rule says foot, if a player touches the lane with any part of his body, I have a violation. The foot is used because players are allowed to lean over the FT lane without penalty. Breaking the plane with the foot is the first "step" in entering the lane too soon. The NFHS was not invisioning such a scenario when they worded this rule. Yes, it's something that should be addressed by rule but until they do, a little common sense has to be used. Call it disconcertion if you like.

Chuck?

Oh, ChucK?

This might be a good case play to send in too. We missed this one.

I agree with the above too btw. Common sense.

[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Chuck?

Please. Violation.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

While the rule says foot, if a player touches the lane with any part of his body, I have a violation. The foot is used because players are allowed to lean over the FT lane without penalty. Breaking the plane with the foot is the first "step" in entering the lane too soon. The NFHS was not invisioning such a scenario when they worded this rule. Yes, it's something that should be addressed by rule but until they do, a little common sense has to be used. Call it disconcertion if you like.

You're lucky Mr. Spelling Guy is gone for the weekend!

[BillyMac]

Nevadaref:

May I respectfully ask, in the original case in this thread, how has the player not "(left) a marked lane space" ?

I'm sure that many officials, including mayself, possibly you, have called violations for players backing out of the lane space (3 feet deep) to be replaced by a taller teammate or to be closer to the man they're covering, to a player switching lane spaces with teammate by moving laterally to get a better matchup, or to teammates switching lane positions across the lane to get a better matchup.

How does a player entering the lane space by placing their hand in the lane not qualify as "leaving a marked lane space"? Are we utilizing the Tower Philosophy or the philsophy of advantage disadvantage here ? When a player is off balance near a sideline, endline, or division line (from frontcourt) and places their hand out of bounds (or backcourt) do we not call the violation ?

One thing that I agree with you about, is that we differ in opinion, but I prefer to call it a difference in "interpretation". Perhaps there is an association or board interpreter in the Forum with more experience than you or me (25 years, mostly high school varsity) that can offer some type of official interpretation.

Bottom line for me: I would call this a violation, but I would like to know for sure that I have a rule or interpretation citation to back up may call. Right now I'm pretty sure about my own humble interpretatation, but I would like to be 100% sure my way or your way.