foul out and free throws with a T

[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! )

[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.

[RookieDude]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

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.

Didn't a guy by the name of Socrates say something like:

"A true wise man...knows that he is not truely wise."

Once again...JR shows that he is truely a wise man.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by RookieDude

Didn't a guy by the name of Socrates say something like:

"A true wise man...knows that he is not truely wise."

The asterisk said "except that jerk JR" (they went thru the second grade together, twice).

[RookieDude]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

The asterisk said "except that jerk JR" (they went thru the second grade together, twice).

LMAO...guys...this is a guy you would like to have a brown pop with.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

The asterisk said "except that jerk JR" (they went thru the second grade together, twice).

The second grade was the best 5 years of my life.

[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.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

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.

This is a situation where I would ask for a current ruling from our rules interpreter. I would not be surprised if I do not get the same answer as this interpretation back in 2000.

Peace

[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This is a situation where I would ask for a current ruling from our rules interpreter. I would not be surprised if I do not get the same answer as this interpretation back in 2000.

With all due respect (and I mean that sincerely), that would be a problem with your interpreter and not with the ruling. Once a ruling is issued, it is valid until a rule change or different ruling is issued.

[reffish]

So after all the debate, I am not sure what the ruling is. Before the FT, player A, who fouled out with the T, is removed from the game and substitute shots the FT (and must remain in game until after time on clock is run).

If Player A shoots FT, and before ball is put in play, after the T shots, substitute player for A comes in, must he shoot the FT or points stay and the ball is given to team who shot the T?

Thanks for all the answers posted. Didn't realize this would cause a commotion.

Also, what would the ruling be in NCAA M and W?

[zebraman]

Originally Posted by reffish

So after all the debate, I am not sure what the ruling is. Before the FT, player A, who fouled out with the T, is removed from the game and substitute shots the FT (and must remain in game until after time on clock is run).

If Player A shoots FT, and before ball is put in play, after the T shots, substitute player for A comes in, must he shoot the FT or points stay and the ball is given to team who shot the T?

Thanks for all the answers posted. Didn't realize this would cause a commotion.

Also, what would the ruling be in NCAA M and W?

NFHS: If the fouled out player is removed properly, the sub shoots the FT's. If the official crew did not recognize that the player was disqualified and he is allowed to shoot, the FT's are allowed and this does not fall under the correctable error rule.

EXCEPTION: If you are Rut and don't want to admit that you might have missed one, you trot out the old overused "regional thing" or "my interpreter can beat up your interpreter thing" and ignore all the evidence.

Z