Time-out?

[Camron Rust]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob jenkins
Yes. And, if we change the situation from a throw in to a free throw, it's the only way for the team to avoid a violation.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Are you sure about that, Bob?

Hmm. I guess you could come up with some other infractions that would make the ball dead that don't cancel the FT.....Team A could commit a foul, be fouled, have a player leave the court for an unauthorized reason, swing elbows, etc.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Quote:




Hmm. I guess you could come up with some other infractions that would make the ball dead that don't cancel the FT.....Team A could commit a foul, be fouled, have a player leave the court for an unauthorized reason, swing elbows, etc.

I think that Nevada is referring to the situation where the FT shooter isn't in the semi-circle when the official placed the ball at his disposal. If he comes in now, it's a violation. If he doesn't come in, it's gonna be a 10-second violation. Iow, no matter what, he's screwed.The question is whether calling a TO voids the violation or only delays it until after the TO.

Notice that I said that I think that's what Nevada was getting at.

[Nevadaref]

I actually meant what Camron wrote. Specifically, I was thinking of a foul by Team B (personal or technical). Since the shooter is obviously not going to be in the act of shooting, the ball becomes dead and the FT would be readministered without a violation by Team A.

Of course, I'm being petty and really Bob is right that a time-out is the simplest way for Team A to avoid a violation. It's just not the only way.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

The question is whether calling a TO voids the violation or only delays it until after the TO.

FWIW, I believe that the after the TO the shooter would be allowed to enter the FT semi-circle without penalty.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

The question is whether calling a TO voids the violation or only delays it until after the TO.

I'd vote for no violation. In the situation where B steps in, then we have an A TO before the shot, the violation has actually occurred. We're simply delaying the penalty.

If A1 never stepped into the circle, no violation has occurred (assuming the TO was requested and granted before the 10 second count expired). Therefore, I have no penalty.

(This also fits the general pattern of A being able to use a timeout to avoid certain violations.)

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

I'd vote for no violation. In the situation where B steps in, then we have an A TO before the shot, the violation has actually occurred. We're simply delaying the penalty.

If A1 never stepped into the circle, no violation has occurred (assuming the TO was requested and granted before the 10 second count expired). Therefore, I have no penalty.

(This also fits the general pattern of A being able to use a timeout to avoid certain violations.)

Case book play 9.1.7 says "After the ball has been placed at the disposal of the free thrower, he/she is not permitted to leave or enter the free-throw semi-circle without violating, until restrictions have ended." According to rule 9-10, free throw restrictions are in place until the ball touches the ring or backboard or until the free throw ends.

Thoughts?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Case book play 9.1.7 says "After the ball has been placed at the disposal of the free thrower, he/she is not permitted to leave or enter the free-throw semi-circle without violating, until restrictions have ended." According to rule 9-10, free throw restrictions are in place until the ball touches the ring or backboard or until the free throw ends.

Thoughts?

Interesting. Now, to bring in an NCAA case into this, let's say A1 has the ball for a FT, and B1 steps in the lane early. The official signals the delayed dead ball. Then, A's coach asks for, and is granted a TO. After the TO, we line up for the FT, and the delayed violation continues. Iow, if A1 misses, they are granted a replacement FT, because the TO does not wipe away the violation.

Again, this is an NCAA A.R., not a Fed. case play. But, in this case, the violation has already occured. In JR's case, a violation has not yet occured.

Hmm...

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Case book play 9.1.7 says "After the ball has been placed at the disposal of the free thrower, he/she is not permitted to leave or enter the free-throw semi-circle without violating, until restrictions have ended." According to rule 9-10, free throw restrictions are in place until the ball touches the ring or backboard or until the free throw ends.

Thoughts?

Yes. You're mixing manure again.

Suppose A1 was in the circle, then A was granted a TO. Clearly A1 can leave teh circle for the TO, then return for the FT. The same applies to A1 not bing in the circle and A being granted a TO.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Interesting. Now, to bring in an NCAA case into this, let's say A1 has the ball for a FT, and B1 steps in the lane early. The official signals the delayed dead ball. Then, A's coach asks for, and is granted a TO. After the TO, we line up for the FT, and the delayed violation continues. Iow, if A1 misses, they are granted a replacement FT, because the TO does not wipe away the violation.

Again, this is an NCAA A.R., not a Fed. case play

The ruling is the same in both codes.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Yes. You're mixing manure again.

JR? Manure-mixer? Imagine that.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The ruling is the same in both codes.

I wasn't sure when I started typing, that's why I stated the NCAA ruling. Does it show as a case play somewhere?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

But ...suppose A1 wasn't in the semi-circle when you put the ball down at his disposal .......

Can A1 now come into the semicircle without violating?

That was my question.

Before the TO is granted, no.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Case book play 9.1.7 says "After the ball has been placed at the disposal of the free thrower, he/she is not permitted to leave or enter the free-throw semi-circle without violating, until restrictions have ended." According to rule 9-10, free throw restrictions are in place until the ball touches the ring or backboard or until the free throw ends.

Thoughts?

I like your thinking, but 4-20-3 comes into play and states that "The free throw ends when the try is successful, when it is certain the try will not become successful, when the try touches the floor or any player, or when the ball becomes dead." When the timeout is granted, the ball is dead, the free throw has ended and we can no longer have this specific violation on the shooter.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

I like your thinking, but 4-20-3 comes into play and states that "The free throw ends when the try is successful, when it is certain the try will not become successful, when the try touches the floor or any player, or when the ball becomes dead." When the timeout is granted, the ball is dead, the free throw has ended and we can no longer have this specific violation on the shooter.

Ok, then why can't we have this specific violation, but the TO doesn't wipe out the other violation I mentioned?

And, if you're saying the FT ended, how come the player gets to do it again when they come back out after the TO?

(Hey, this manure-stirring is kinda fun.)

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Ok, then why can't we have this specific violation, but the TO doesn't wipe out the other violation I mentioned?

And, if you're saying the FT ended, how come the player gets to do it again when they come back out after the TO?

(Hey, this manure-stirring is kinda fun.)

I think because 9-1-Penalties-2 essentially states that that particular try must occur and subsequently be unsuccessful for the violation to be penalized.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Ok, then why can't we have this specific violation, but the TO doesn't wipe out the other violation I mentioned?

And, if you're saying the FT ended, how come the player gets to do it again when they come back out after the TO?

(Hey, this manure-stirring is kinda fun.)

Good question. I figured this would come up. I'm having trouble finding the NFHS ruling which allows the delayed violation on B to be called after a timeout. Anyone care to point me in the right direction?

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

And, if you're saying the FT ended, how come the player gets to do it again when they come back out after the TO?

(Hey, this manure-stirring is kinda fun.)

Holy manure-stirring semantics, M&MMan!

From what I can find, I understand what you're saying here. The free throw definition rule states specifically that the free throw ends when the ball becomes dead (which is what happens when a time-out is granted), and the Rule 10 Summary never uses the word "attempt" - only the term "free throw."

So foul with two free throws awarded. Ball is at the shooter's disposal. Free throw begins here. Shooting team requests and is granted a time-out. Free throw ends here.

1st free throw over?

Better yet, what about the front end of a 1 and 1 - same scenario? After the time-out: ball to B on the baseline?