The Official Forum - Repeated Lane Violation

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)

- - Repeated Lane Violation (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/31777-repeated-lane-violation.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rule Book

The Intent and Purpose of the Rules (paragraph 2)
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 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.

Unless you think the purpose of this rule is to reward the defense, we have a problem with this tactic. The next problem is what to do about it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Case Book

9.3.2 Situation D: Comment: Non-contact, away from the ball, illegal defensive violations (i.e. excessively swinging the elbows, leaving the floor for an unauthorized reason) specifically designed to stop the clock near the end of a period or take away a clear advantageous position by the offense should be temporarily ignored. The defensive team should not benefit from the tactic. If time is not a factor, the defense should be penalized with the violation or a technical foul for unsporting behavior. (10-1-8)

This makes it pretty clear that the method the NFHS would prefer we use is to simply ignore the lane violation in this instance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Unless you think the purpose of this rule is to reward the defense, we have a problem with this tactic. The next problem is what to do about it.

This makes it pretty clear that the method the NFHS would prefer we use is to simply ignore the lane violation in this instance.

Yep, and they also want you to call an intentional in the last minutes of a ball game when they foul to stop the clock as well as assess a technical foul when a coach is coaching outside the coacing box. I'm willing to bet that most do neither (unless the coach is a problem). Again, my point is this strategy puts a "crimp" on the official because of the cat and mouse aspect of the thinking . . . one is trying to miss and one is trying to force him to make it. I'm gonna let em keep going and see what happens.

Why? One is trying to gain an advantage not intended by the rule, something the Fed specifically says it doesn't want. The other is simply trying to miss a free throw; something there is no rule against. I'm siding with the team not doing something illegal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mountaineer

and they also want you to call an intentional in the last minutes of a ball game when they foul to stop the clock

No they don't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by blindzebra

No, it's a bad timeout, because the coach is knowingly and intentionally breaking the rules hoping to gain an advantge...that is completely unethical and actually breaks the NFHS Coaches Associations code of conduct.

There was nothing wrong with the timeout, what he told his kids to do, that's a different story... But, you have to take the timeout here... you may not get the rebound to call timeout after a second miss..

Coach Mac

Hopefully nobody will mind the resurrection of this old post I found while searching for something else.

What if the shooting team was down by 2 and wanted to have a chance to get a rebound and tie the game. Now by forcing them to make the freethrow it eliminates any chance of allowing the team to tie or win on the putback. This would also allow the non shooting team to begin their blockouts and secure position and eliminate any chance(ok fluke chance) of getting the offensive rebound, and that you could just look the other way on the violation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BDevil15 (Post 663357)

Discussed before. T on team B for "failing to allow the ball to become or remain live" or whatever the specific words are.