3-point foul
 

Novice official here making sure the call was right. Freshmen boys game with Team A down 2 with 30 seconds left. A1 shoots 3 pointer and touches down while ball is still in flight. B1 boxes out to the extent of knocking A1 to the floor. After all of this, ball hits rim and comes out. I blow whistle just before ball hits rim. Shooting 3. Coach thinks its a floor foul and should be 1 and 1. Was this the right call?

BTW, A1 misses 2 of 3 throws and game ends with Team A down 1.

Once shooter touches down, foul isn't on the shot anymore. You kicked it. But don't worry, you'll never do it again! You own it now.

Oh, and by the way, welcome to the board. We like new folks who are interested in getting it right.

That's the rule that I wanted to know. The touching of the floor was so close to the foul that I had very little argument anyway. I just really wanted to know when the opportunity for a shooting foul stops on a long distance shot like that. Thanks.

Think "on the shot" = "airborne shooter". Once the shooter touches down, she's not airborne anymore, is she? That's an easy way to remember that one item.

Another thing I try to do is to hold the whistle just a second and not call it till the ball goes in or is at least on the way through. it makes it easier to sell. If you wait to blow it, the whistle is easier to associate with "after the shot".

I like this. I'm going to add it to my bag o' tools. :)

I'm going with the inverse of rainmaker here, and going to say blow it as soon as possible and don't split hairs if the foul is so close to the kid landing that it is bang bang. Give him the three shots. Thats not to say if we have a release and its quite a while after he lands that he gets fouled. then I believe you have to give it on the ground.

Yup, just ignore the rule if it makes it easier on you. :(

Let me rephrase btaylor's post: There are many "benefit of the doubt" calls and the benefit of the doubt shoud go to the shooter. That is, if there's doubt as to whether the shooter had returned to the floor, then s/he was still airborne and the foul would be "in the act of shooting."

Now me: If my paraphrase is correct, I agree. IF the shooter is *clearly* on the floor, then the foul is after the shot.

I personally consider the player an airborne shooter until s/he has been able to collect themselves on the ground (both feet down and regained balance). If s/he is contacted before that I still call it as an airborne shooter.

I read the OP as just one foot down and would call this a shooting foul.

According to the rules, a shooter's airborne status ends when <b>one</b> foot touches the court. You're calling it wrong.

You can't be airborne if you're touching the court. The definition of an "airborne shooter" in rule 4-1-1 states that the shooter has <b>not</b> returned to the floor.

I agree; if there's some doubt, benefit goes to the shooter. However, it it's bang/bang but I can still tell the shooter clearly landed first; common foul.

But does it define returning to the floor?

Seriously?:eek:

You think that an odd question? Seriously, there is no reason that returns to the floor and touches the floor necessarily have identical meanings. They may, but consider the possiblility that returns to the floor means more than the big toe has regained contact with the floor.

The main point of the airborne shooter rule is safety, extending airborne shooter protection to both feet on the floor is not, IMO, inconsitent with the rules as written or intended.