The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 26, 2006, 12:20am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuckElias
What you say seems reasonable, Bob. But the reason for the rule change was not the play you mention in (a). The reason for the rule change was to penalize blocking the FT on the way up, immediately out of the shooter's hand.

Picture this very familiar scenario. Team A is down by 2 points and A1 is awarded 2 FTs in the closing seconds of the 4th quarter. A1 misses the first FT. We all know what's going to happen next, right? A1 is going to miss the FT intentionally and attempt to get the rebound for a put-back to tie the game.

What's the best defense against this possibility? Block the FT as soon as it is out of the shooter's hand. Before the rule change, it was simply 1 point and the ball was awarded to Team B. But this clearly is an unfair use of the rule. So to prevent teams from doing that in the closing seconds, the rule committee added the extra penalty of the T. This way, Team A still has a chance to tie or win the game. (The reason it's not a T for BI is that it's possible to commit BI while genuinely trying for the rebound; that is, while making a "basketball play". GT during a FT can never be considered a "basketball play".)

So, as unlikely as it seems, I think it's a good rule. To treat your examples (a) and (b) the same way makes sense, as I said. But to implement it, you'd need to penalize some forms of GT differently from other forms.
Chuck, you got the rule change I'm talking about backwards. Before the change it was a T for either BI or GT on a FT. The change reduced the infraction for BI to a violation only. Perhaps their was some earlier change that made them both a T but that was much longer ago.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 26, 2006, 07:41am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Western Mass.
Posts: 9,105
Send a message via AIM to ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
Chuck, you got the rule change I'm talking about backwards. Before the change it was a T for either BI or GT on a FT. The change reduced the infraction for BI to a violation only. Perhaps their was some earlier change that made them both a T but that was much longer ago.
Very true, Camron. I understood the change you were talking about (reducing BI to a violation only). I was throwing out the original reason for making GT and BI technical fouls in the first place. I did see your point. Sorry if I only muddled it.
__________________
Any NCAA rules and interpretations in this post are relevant for men's games only!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
3 man mechanic on sideline throw in below free throw line extended!!!! jritchie Basketball 10 Tue Nov 01, 2005 02:43pm
Throw In After a Basket BeenThereBefore Basketball 16 Sun Oct 30, 2005 06:38pm
ncaa Basket interference on throw in??? jritchie Basketball 6 Tue Oct 25, 2005 07:54am
Goaltending and Basket Interference on a Throw in RdBallRef Basketball 8 Fri Oct 12, 2001 01:23pm
BASKET INTERFERENCE DURING FREE THROW SHANE MEENACH Basketball 2 Thu Oct 21, 1999 01:20pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:23pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1