Free Throw Violation
 

Ball is given to shooter by ref at free throw line . Girl catches ball, bounces it and loses control. She steps in the lane to retreive fumbled ball. It this a free throw violation?

P.S. this was a 10 year old girl.

By rule, yes. The L should whistle the play dead before she can go after the ball.

The NFHS case play for this is 9.1.1 regardless of what age the players are. Even if the official's are a little slow on the whistle, please use common sense and just give the shooter a replacement throw.

Make sure when you use the phrase "by rule" that you are actually right. This is not a violation.

Tony is actually right. Notice that the case book play, of which he is well-aware, says "the official should sound the whistle to prevent any violations and then start the free throw procedure again."

In the play presented a violation has already occurred prior to the official taking any action. Therefore, by rule, the free thrower has committed violation. Now any decent official is going to bend the rule a bit and simply sound the whistle as quickly as possible and readminister the FT.

Make sure that you read the case book play cited--9.1.1-- before you make statements like the above.

That case play <b>is</b> a rule. It basically says that the FTshooter going to get the fumbled ball would be committing a violation(as per rule 9-1-7). The official should blow the whistle to <b>prevent</b> a violation, and then re-set the FT <b>before</b> the FT shooter actually commits that violation.

Iow, BktBallRef was completely right in his statement, <b>by rule</b>.

Make sure you know WTF you're talking about before you disagree with me. :D

How is it a violation? If the free thrower hasn't started the throwing motion it is not a violation, if it was the play would say it was a violation. Where in Case Play 9.1.1 does it say that what happen is a violation???

I apologize, I missed that she ran after the ball!

If the FT shooter moves to recover the fumbled ball, they will commit a FT violation as per NFHS rule 9-1-7. Case book play 9.1.1 says that you can avoid calling the violation <b>IF</b> you blow your whistle <b>BEFORE</b> the violation is committed. If the FT shooter commits the violation <b>BEFORE</b> you blow your whistle though, then it is too late to re-set the play, <b>by rule</b>.

As Z said above though, don't be a plumber. Just re-set the damn thing- especially with 10 year old kids.

If one of my local ref league refs called this against a 10 year old, I'd smack him (or her, Juulie) upside the head with a frying pan, then make him (or her) sit in a closet reading all of Old Tool's posts while listening to an endless loop of Billy Packer rules comments. :eek:

UH . . . I would NEVER make that call in YOUR league . . . I can handle the whole frying pan thing, even reading Old Tool's comments, but Billy Packer . . . NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! :D

We seem to have several players locally who are now passing the ball around their body a couple of times before a couple of bounces and then the attempt.

I would be more apt to call a violation on someone doing this who then drops the ball past the line and goes to retrieve it.

Ha ! :)
I have to say that the temptation to call it would be very real.
Dunno if I could.

What would you do, as an officiating crew, if the FT shooter decides to go talk to the coach as the L is ready to administer the 1st FT?

The player actually went to the sideline and held a brief conversation with the coach...as the officials were telling him to go back to the line.
(I wasn't there, so I don't know how many times the officials had to tell the player...or how long it took the player to go back to the line.)

How about following the specified ruling? ;)

DELAY BY FREE THROWER
10.3.6 SITUATION: The calling official has reported the foul and has given directions to players along the lane. The official is ready to put the ball at free thrower A1's disposal, but A1 is at the sideline talking to the coach. RULING: A technical foul for delay is charged to A1. No warning is authorized in this situation. (10-3-6c)

We talked about this situation...and giving the T. But, the officials went on to ask if:

a) they could have used their "game management" skills and just got the player to return to the line before any big delay.

b) there was a violation for the player leaving the semi-circle once the L was ready to administer.

c) they could have given a delay warning as the player was leaving the semi-circle.

For what it's worth...I told them:
a) probably, if the player didn't continue to the bench
b) not that I know of
c) not one of the 4 delay warnings

what say you...

Perhaps, an official could have reminded the player that he's the shooter and/or asked if he was injured or "something".

Spoken like a true veteran.

I agree with your answers. If the FT shooter immediately returns to the semi-circle without going to the bench, tell him not to do that again and administer the FT. If he ignores you and continues to the bench, call the immediate technical foul. You'd never warn him twice though.

RD,
Your answers are correct.
For part (b) just note that the requirement for the FT shooter not to leave (or enter per the case book) the semicircle begins AFTER the ball becomes live on the FT which is when it is placed at the disposal of the thrower.

Yep...thanks, mick, JR and Nevada (good case play BTW)...just looking for a little validation.;)

Response From Officail who made the call
 

"It was a championship junior high school tournament game. 2. We play under the umbrella of the LHSAA/Federation rules. To that end let me quote the rule that applies and the intent behind that rule. Under the Rules Enforcement paragraph of the LHSAA rules book it states "Officials need to be aware that personal interpretations of the rules have a negative impact on the game. The rules are written to provide a balance between offense and defense, minimize risks to participants, promote the sound tradition of the game and promote fair play. Individual philosophies and diviation from the rules as written negatively impact the basic fundamentals and tenants of the rules. The free throw rule is specific in that it is a violation if after receiving and having control of the ball the free thrower has either foot beyond the vertical plane of the edge of the free throw line prior to the basketball entering the basket or hitting the rim of the basket. The bottom line - we are paid to call the game according to the rules that apply."

:rolleyes: <i></i>

Is that the dialect used in LA? :D

Here is the response that I would send back:
THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE RULES
The restrictions which the rules place upon the players are intended to create a balance of play; to provide equal opportunity between the offense and the defense; to provide equal opportunity between the small player and tall player; to provide reasonable safety and protection; to create an atmosphere of sporting behavior and fair play; and to emphasize cleverness and skill without unduly limiting freedom of action of individual or team play on either offense or defense.
Therefore, it is important to know the intent and purpose of a rule so that it may be intelligently applied in each play situation. A player or a team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule. Neither should play be permitted to develop which may lead to placing a player at a disadvantage not intended by a rule.
It is the policy of the NFHS Basketball Rules Committee that there be no deviation from the rules unless experimental approval has been granted by the NFHS liaison to the rules committee.

---------------
FREE-THROWER LOSES BALL
9.1.1 SITUATION: A1, at the free throw line to attempt a free throw (a) muffs the pass from the official and it rolls forward; or (b) accidentally drops the ball before the throwing motion is started. RULING: In (a) and (b) the official should sound the whistle to prevent any violations and then start the free throw procedure again.

:p

I git it, now. It's a rule requiring the prevention of a violation, as opposed to a rule penalizing a violation.
If we employ the accepted slow whistle, the rule goes away and the violation goes with it. It becomes omniabsent.

Ask them when the LHSAA's 3-person mechanics are planning of coming out of the early 90s. Their document online still requires the center to be opposite the table at all times and for the foul caller to become the center official. Is that really how they work in LA?

When I lived there, it was all 2-person.

#1, I don't believe the official SAID this. There must have been some type of written response that you're quoting. This is directly from this year's NFHS Points of Emphasis.

#2, The official made the correct call. If he's able to kill the play before the shooter crosses the lane, great. If not, it's a violation. Can discretion be used in a 10 year old game? Yes. Does it make the official wrong if he follows the rule? No, it doesn't, in spite of what the OP thinks.

#3, The original poster is pissed because the call was made. Further, he does NOT know the rule. After I responsed with the initial reply in this thread, he PM'ed me.

Basically, he looking for a scapegoat.

While BktBallRef makes valid points, the fact remains that the official did not use good judgment in applying the purpose and intent of the rule. The rule which prohibits the free thrower from breaking the plane of the FT line is clearly for the purpose of preventing the shooter from jumping closer to the basket while trying for goal. It is not intended to take away a FT opportunity from a player who dropped the ball prior to shooting it.

I think that the OP has a right to be upset.