foul out and free throws with a T

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Case Book Play 4.14.1 SITUATION A: DISQUALIFICATION

A1 is fouled by B1 while team A is in the bonus. The covering official is at the table reporting the foul when A1 is charged with a technical foul by thje official who is observing the players. The foul on A1 is his/her fifth.
RULING: A1 is disqualified as both personal and technical fouls are counted. Because A1 has been disqualified, he/she will not be allowed to attempt the free throw(s) resulting from B1's foul. The substitute for A1 will shoot the free throw(s). (8-2)

And if A1's substitute doesn't shoot the free throws, it now becomes a correctable error under rule 2-10, yada, yada, yada......

Do you people honestly feel that the FED intended to throw the correctable error rule and everything else that I cited down the toilet just because a disqualified player wasn't notified? He was still disqualified, wasn't he?

Lah me.....

NO! He was not.

This case is only marginally relevant in our situation; it only matters in the situation where the disqualification occurs before the FTs are taken. A1 is not disqualified until the coach is notified....you can't throw that rule out just to make your argument work. Until A1 is disqualified, A1 is the correct player to shoot the FTs. It doesn't matter what should have happened. A late disqualification is not a correctable situation.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

My rule citation above is the relevant one to this play, as Camron just pointed out.

And I think that you, Camron and Nevada are completely wrong too.

Guess we need an NFHS ruling from somewhere(and please don't give me an IAABO ruling or a ruling from some rules interpreter out in Portland who doesn't have any stroke either; they're about as official as I am).

This mighta been a good one to send in to the FED....way back.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Guess we need an NFHS ruling from somewhere

FED 2000-2001 Basketball Interpretations, Supplement #1:

SITUATION 6: A1 is fouled and Team A is in the bonus. Before A1 attempts the one-and-one, A1 is whistled for a technical foul for taunting. A1 goes to the free-throw line to attempt the one-and-one with no players lined up. A1 makes the first free thtrow, then the horn sounds and the scorer indicates that A1's technical foul was the fifth foul on A1. RULING: The result of A1's first free throw shall stand and A1's replacement shall attempt the remaining free throw (if the first was successful), before Team B shoots its technical free throws. COMMENT: This is not a correctable error for a wrong player attempting a free throw. A1 was not officially disqualified until the coach was notified.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

FED 2000-2001 Basketball Interpretations, Supplement #1:

SITUATION 6: A1 is fouled and Team A is in the bonus. Before A1 attempts the one-and-one, A1 is whistled for a technical foul for taunting. A1 goes to the free-throw line to attempt the one-and-one with no players lined up. A1 makes the first free thtrow, then the horn sounds and the scorer indicates that A1's technical foul was the fifth foul on A1. RULING: The result of A1's first free throw shall stand and A1's replacement shall attempt the remaining free throw (if the first was successful), before Team B shoots its technical free throws. COMMENT: This is not a correctable error for a wrong player attempting a free throw. A1 was not officially disqualified until the coach was notified.

That'll do it for me.

I stand corrected. Good catch, Bob.

Those rulings usually go into the next year's case book. That one didn't. Wonder why.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

That'll do it for me.

I stand corrected. Good catch, Bob.

Those rulings usually go into the next year's case book. That one didn't. Wonder why.

Maybe the NF does not go along with that ruling today. After all this was about 5 years ago. The NF has been known to change interpretations from one year to another. If that is what they want, they sure are not using their books very well to make that clear.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Maybe the NF does not go along with that ruling today. After all this was about 5 years ago. The NF has been known to change interpretations from one year to another. If that is what they want, they sure are not using their books very well to make that clear.

Hey Rut, !

At least JR is man enough to admit when he is wrong.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Hey Rut, !

At least JR is man enough to admit when he is wrong.

JR believes in 5 and 6 year old rulings, I do not.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Injury/Correctable error?

This thread contains a similar situation involving an injury in which Bob provided the definitive NFHS interp from 2000-01. It is likely this one which I was remembering when I wondered about an NFHS interp in my earlier post.
Also in a post during that thread, I mentioned the play with the T and failure to disqualify. I knew that I had written about this play before on this forum!

It seems that 2000-01 really had some significant play rulings and strangely I don't have a copy.

Bob,
Since you seem to still have them, and the NFHS doesn't have an online archive of its interps, would you please post the entire 2000-01 interps, including all the supplements, if there was more than one, or if there was an original list and then that was followed by a supplementary list?

(I believe that Situation 1 is going to put a point in JR's column. There is a traveling play involving a fumble by an airborne player which we have been debating, and apparently I'm on the wrong side of that one! )

[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

FED 2000-2001 Basketball Interpretations, Supplement #1:

After I shut off the computer last night, I also remembered that this play is specifically covered in the NCAA rulebook as an AR in the rule section for "Disqualification".

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

At least JR is man enough to admit when he is wrong.

It's always a good day when I learn something. If I was wrong and I didn't learn sumthin' from it, well, that wouldn't be very smart on my part.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Maybe the NF does not go along with that ruling today. After all this was about 5 years ago. The NF has been known to change interpretations from one year to another. If that is what they want, they sure are not using their books very well to make that clear.

True, but from the lack of any definitive direction from anywhere else, I think that you have to accept what is available, and what is available is the ruling that Bob cited. I usually print out the rulings off of the FED web site, but that particular year is missing in my records...unfortunately.

[btaylor64]

Jurassic,

From the post I have read I thought you hated the NBA. It seems by your previous ruling that you love it. Had this play happened in a NBA game you would have been right on the top of it.

And you said you didn't like the NBA.


Warning: This post was written as a light hearted joke. Please take no offense.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

Jurassic,

From the post I have read I thought you hated the NBA. It seems by your previous ruling that you love it. Had this play happened in a NBA game you would have been right on the top of it.

And you said you didn't like the NBA.


Warning: This post was written as a light hearted joke. Please take no offense.

Uh-oh...don't be messing with Jurassic...rumor has it he's gone off his Metamucil in the last few days...not a good idea to make him angry!!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

Jurassic,

From the post I have read I thought you hated the NBA. It seems by your previous ruling that you love it. Had this play happened in a NBA game you would have been right on the top of it.

And you said you didn't like the NBA.


Warning: This post was written as a light hearted joke. Please take no offense.

Actually, I'm just not fond of the kinda ball the NBA is playing right now. Everything is highlight-reel stuff... dunks, no-look passes, etc....and a lot of the supposedly best players in the world can't really shoot, dribble or make a basic pass. Everything is entertainment rather than actual competition. If I wanted to watch sumthin' like that, I'd watch the AND1 tour. The basics are missing imo, and it's showing up at the World Championships and the Olympics. When a country like Greece can beat a hand-picked NBA team, you got major problems.

Of course, there still are a few teams in the NBA that are watchable...example Phoenix.

I feel sorry for the NBA officials. They gotta be the most critiqued officials group in the world, in any sport. Every call that they make is gone over with a microscope. Anymore, I think that their job has become basically impossible to do. Officiating a game where entertainment is the main priority has gotta be harder than hell to do. Not mentioning morons like Mark Cuban either....

That's just my opinion. Other people love the current NBA model of play. Good for 'em. Everybody to their own taste.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Uh-oh...don't be messing with Jurassic...rumor has it he's gone off his Metamucil in the last few days...not a good idea to make him angry!!

Nope, not my Metamucil. My Lithium.

I know where you live.