Missed FT Violation - FYI

[Zoochy]

Originally Posted by theboys

The high school my son played for had a JV girl who would make a little practice shot immediately above her - to practice her form, I guess - before attempting the actual free throw. She got away with it for a couple of games. I was surprised it wasn't called earlier. Although she wasn't trying to trick anyone, it was definitely, for lack of a better term, "disconcerting".

I don't understand.... How was that a violation????

[CoachP]

Zooch- I guess that would depend on if she had the ball for the "practice"

[mick]

Originally Posted by CoachP

Zooch- I guess that would depend on if she had the ball for the "practice"

I dunno.
Is a trial "shot" that different from tossing the ball a foot or two with a backward spin before grabbing and shooting ? ...Or, for that matter, from merely bouncing the ball once or twice ?

...Hangin' with Zooch.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Zoochy

I don't understand.... How was that a violation????

Dunno...if she does it the same every time, it's legal imo.

[CoachP]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Dunno...if she does it the same every time, it's legal imo.

???
So A1 steps up to the line, you flip her the ball, she takes a couple practice "Shots" straight up in the air, and we let that go?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by CoachP

???
So A1 steps up to the line, you flip her the ball, she takes a couple practice "Shots" straight up in the air, and we let that go?

As long as it's not a "fake," yes.

[drinkeii]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

As long as it's not a "fake," yes.

I would agree with this also - it's not a violation by rule, or common sense (if no trickery was involved - then it is a violation for both reasons - but that isn't what the OP said).

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by CoachP

???
So A1 steps up to the line, you flip her the ball, she takes a couple practice "Shots" straight up in the air, and we let that go?

If it's part of her normal routine and she's not getting any kind of advantage out of it, why wouldn't we?

There's no rule against it.

[KCRef]

What if one of the 6 players lined up for the free-throw does the same thing as the shooter in the OP? Steps on the line and slides their foot back behind the line to get just as close as they can? Does not affect the play. Would this be a lane violation?

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by KCRef

What if one of the 6 players lined up for the free-throw does the same thing as the shooter in the OP? Steps on the line and slides their foot back behind the line to get just as close as they can? Does not affect the play. Would this be a lane violation?

A little OT, but can someone explain to me why girls along the lane place one foot on the floor regularly and the other foot up on one toe like that is giving them a head start on getting into the lane? Besides looking dumb, it doesn't do anything. 1745 and counting.

[Jesse James]

Originally Posted by KCRef

What if one of the 6 players lined up for the free-throw does the same thing as the shooter in the OP? Steps on the line and slides their foot back behind the line to get just as close as they can? Does not affect the play. Would this be a lane violation?

Good philosophical question. Always thought this was a dichotomy, myself. On the free-thrower "over-toeing" the line, most officials in our area would let it slide, or maybe just make mention of to the free-thrower afterward. But if a guy lining up on the lane accidently steps in right after the free-thrower has the ball at his disposal, and then steps back...officials were expected to blow the violation. Never understood the difference myself...yet I knew what we were expected to call.

[Adam]

My theory is that it's the same. Before I call this violation on either one, I'm going to tell them to knock it off.

[CoachP]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

If it's part of her normal routine and she's not getting any kind of advantage out of it, why wouldn't we?

There's no rule against it.

Not trying to drag this on....but.....

9-4 "The free thrower shall not fake a try,..."

Some one mentioned flipping the ball with 2 hands with backspin and the ball comes back to the shooter. This is part of his/her routine. Flipping the ball in the air mimicking a "practice" shot is part of a routine....etc.

That's fine. I can live with that.

Why then, bother to have "fake" in the rule book? In NF, the try and all the restrictions do not end until the ball hits ring or backboard anyways.

A shooter can always just say, "What? Are you a mind reader?* That was just part of my routine to pump the ball towards the ring without letting go. It loosens up my shirt sleeves."

*see all previous post re: try vs. pass

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by CoachP

Not trying to drag this on....but.....

9-4 "The free thrower shall not fake a try,..."

Coach, most officials know the difference between faking a try and going through a set FT routine. Seriously. It ain't that hard.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by CoachP

9-4 "The free thrower shall not fake a try,..."

Some one mentioned flipping the ball with 2 hands with backspin and the ball comes back to the shooter. This is part of his/her routine. Flipping the ball in the air mimicking a "practice" shot is part of a routine....etc.

That's fine. I can live with that.

Why then, bother to have "fake" in the rule book? In NF, the try and all the restrictions do not end until the ball hits ring or backboard anyways.

The rule was changed a few years back (maybe 10 or so) making the players wait for the ball to hit before they entered the lane. Before that, a shooter's fake could easily draw the defense into the lane since they could enter on the release. My guess is they decided not to remove the wording about the fake being a violation for whatever reason.