The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 11:03am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 768
free throw/basket interference

Question:

A-1 attempted the second of two free throws and B-2 touched the ball while it was on the ring and prevented it from entering the basket. What is the call?
I know goal tending is a T on free throw, but is basket interference too, i don't think it is, so would you just award A1 with the point and let B take it out as any other free throw, no other penalties?
__________________
DETERMINATION ALL BUT ERASES THE THIN LINE BETWEEN THE IMPOSSIBLE AND THE POSSIBLE!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 11:05am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Western Mass.
Posts: 9,104
Send a message via AIM to ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally Posted by jritchie
I know goal tending is a T on free throw, but is basket interference too,
No.

Quote:
i don't think it is,
You are correct, sir!

Quote:
so would you just award A1 with the point and let B take it out as any other free throw, no other penalties?
Correct again!!
__________________
Any NCAA rules and interpretations in this post are relevant for men's games only!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 11:10am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Northern California
Posts: 33
I agree that all you have is BI and score the 1 point.
10-4-10 Player technical for goaltending a FT no mention or reference to BI.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 02:11pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,990
Quote:
Originally Posted by refhoops
I agree that all you have is BI and score the 1 point.
10-4-10 Player technical for goaltending a FT no mention or reference to BI.
This was a rule change just a few years ago. Prior to the change, it was a T to commit BI on a FT. It didn't make a lot of since...so they fixed it...violation only.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 02:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
This was a rule change just a few years ago. Prior to the change, it was a T to commit BI on a FT. It didn't make a lot of since...so they fixed it...violation only.
It didn't make much sense either.

Are spending too much time reading Rut's posts?
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 03:10pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 944
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
It didn't make much sense either.

Are spending too much time reading Rut's posts?
Yes, are.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 03:27pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
It didn't make much sense either.

Are spending too much time reading Rut's posts?
And that makes sense?

Pot....kettle....black.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 03:32pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
Are spending too much time reading Rut's posts?
With fire in the mouth he who speaks, suffer many painful scars, will. Herh herh herh.

(Talk like Yoda, you too can.)
http://www.yodaspeak.co.uk/
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 04:35pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,990
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
It didn't make much sense either.

Are spending too much time reading Rut's posts?
Nah, my original sentence was:

It didn't make a lot of sense...they have since fixed it...violation only.


I didn't like the wording so I edited but I kept the wrong sense/since.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 07:07pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 17,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
This was a rule change just a few years ago. Prior to the change, it was a T to commit BI on a FT. It didn't make a lot of since...so they fixed it...violation only.
Typo aside, I think they went "too far" in changing the rule (at least in theory -- in practice, I've never seen either GT or BI on a FT).

Play: While A1's FT try is in flight, B1 enters the lane, jumps and contacts the ball (a) just before the ball enters the imaginary cylinder, or (b) just after the ball enters the imaginary cylinder. Ruling: In (a), GT, and a T. In (b), BI; no T.

It seems to me that there's not much difference between those plays, and they should be treated the same.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 07:21pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Western Mass.
Posts: 9,104
Send a message via AIM to ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins
Play: While A1's FT try is in flight, B1 enters the lane, jumps and contacts the ball (a) just before the ball enters the imaginary cylinder, or (b) just after the ball enters the imaginary cylinder. Ruling: In (a), GT, and a T. In (b), BI; no T.

It seems to me that there's not much difference between those plays, and they should be treated the same.
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.
__________________
Any NCAA rules and interpretations in this post are relevant for men's games only!
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 08:06pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,213
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuckElias
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.
And another good point by Chuck....

Only on a free-throw can GT be called if the ball is touched on the way up by an opponent of the FT shooter. All other forms of goaltending occur when the ball is on the way down.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2006, 09:26pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,990
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins
Typo aside, I think they went "too far" in changing the rule (at least in theory -- in practice, I've never seen either GT or BI on a FT).

Play: While A1's FT try is in flight, B1 enters the lane, jumps and contacts the ball (a) just before the ball enters the imaginary cylinder, or (b) just after the ball enters the imaginary cylinder. Ruling: In (a), GT, and a T. In (b), BI; no T.

It seems to me that there's not much difference between those plays, and they should be treated the same.
True. But the more likely BI case (and the one that the change was really intended to address) is after the ball hits the rim, rolls around the rim, and is maybe coming out but is still on the rim when A3 goes up and dunks it or B3 grabs it off the rim.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 25, 2006, 03:22am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
And that makes sense?

Pot....kettle....black.
That one's a classic, guys!

Glad that I could provide some further amusement while attempting to have a little fun with Camron.

And Dan, I love the Yoda link, thanks!
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 25, 2006, 03:36am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,710
Actually, I like the Yoda link so much that I started playing around with it and it occurred to me to put in a few of the questions from last year's NFHS Part 1 exam and see what they would be like in Yoda-speak, since they don't seem to make much sense in English anyway.

English:
The net shall be constructed so it will momentarily check the ball as it passes through.
Yoda-speak:
The net shall be constructed so, momentarily check the ball as it passes through, will it.

English:
When play is resumed by a throw-in after a double foul occurs, it takes place at the spot closest to the fouls.
Yoda-speak:
When resumed by a throw-in after a double foul occurs, play is, to the fouls it takes place at the spot closest.

English:
The ball does not become dead until the try or tap ends, or until the airborne shooter returns to the floor when the defense commits an excessively swinging elbow violation.
Yoda-speak:
The ball becomes dead until the try or tap ends not, or to the floor until the airborne shooter returns when the defense commits an excessively swinging elbow violation.


Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

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 11:07pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1