Kentucky/Mississippi State Lane Violation

[Jim Bob]

Kentucky shooting a free throw, leading by three, a few seconds left in the game. Kentucky player leaves the lane almost exactly at the same time the official lets go of the ball to throw it to the shooter. Lane violation called. Mississippi State ties game, then goes on to win in OT.

ESPN commentators argue over whether or not it's the right call, spirit vs. letter of the rule, etc. etc.

What do you guys think?

[Dan_ref]

I saw the replay, looked like the L was trying to do it over.

My take: Player at that level in that sitch should know better. If you're going to make the violation that obvious don't expect the officials to cover your azz.

[Nevadaref]

The Lead who was administering the FT blew the whistle, tapped his chest, and was going to reset the FT, when his partners came in and convinced him that a violation needed to be called.

Since the player left his marked lane space before the shooter caught the ball, the time at which it becomes at his disposal, there is no violation for leaving a marked lane space.

9-1-2e. No player shall enter or leave a marked lane space.

However, since the player stopped and turned while remaining inside the 3pt arc, he was breaking another provision of the FT.

9-1-2g. Players not in a legal marked lane space shall remain behind the freethrow line extended and behind the three-point field-goal line until the ball strikes the ring, flange or backboard, or until the free throw ends.

Therefore, in my opinion, the call was justified and the officials were correct to make it. Tubby Smith should have communicated to his player to vacate the lane earlier. He actually caused the violation.

[Nevadaref]

Of course, it can be argued that 9-1-2g doesn't apply either because that provision says "shall remain behind" and obviously a player cannot remain anywhere until he gets to where his is going. Therefore, this rule could be interpreted to only apply to players who are behind the three point line at the time the FT shooter receives the ball.

Since it happened at a crucial juncture of an important game, I expect that we will now see a clarification of these rules from the NCAA.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Of course, it can be argued that 9-1-2g doesn't apply either because that provision says "shall remain behind" and obviously a player cannot remain anywhere until he gets to where his is going.

You're nucking futs.

Remain = stay. As in be there before and remain there. The player not on a marked lane space must stay behind the 3 pt line. If he is inside the 3 pt line/ft line extended but not legally on the lane he's violated.

Period.

[cshs81]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

You're nucking futs.

Remain = stay. As in be there before and remain there. The player not on a marked lane space must stay behind the 3 pt line. If he is inside the 3 pt line/ft line extended but not legally on the lane he's violated.

Period.

Do we agree that he can leave the lane as long as the shooter has not received the ball from the official?

If so, you cannot then penalize the player who left legally simply because he hasn't made it beyond the arc yet.

Would not the prudent thing to do be to get the ball back from the shooter, make sure everyone is set, then resume?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by cshs81

Do we agree that he can leave the lane as long as the shooter has not received the ball from the official?

If so, you cannot then penalize the player who left legally simply because he hasn't made it beyond the arc yet.

Would not the prudent thing to do be to get the ball back from the shooter, make sure everyone is set, then resume?

While you make a nice argument logically, there is nothing that says that the official can't penalize this player who is yet beyond the arc.

That is exactly why I think that we will see an A.R. from the NCAA on this in next year's book.

[cshs81]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Since the player left his marked lane space before the shooter caught the ball, the time at which it becomes at his disposal, there is no violation for leaving a marked lane space.

If "at his disposal" does not start until the thrower actually catches the ball, what would the ref do in this case had the player who left the lane not hesitated? Would he get the ball back from the shooter until all players were set?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by cshs81

If "at his disposal" does not start until the thrower actually catches the ball, what would the ref do in this case had the player who left the lane not hesitated? Would he get the ball back from the shooter until all players were set?

He could or he could do absolutely nothing and let play continue.

[cshs81]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

He could or he could do absolutely nothing and let play continue.

I can't see how he would choose to let play continue when you have a player in no-man's land.

[Nevadaref]

Calm down, Dan. Go have a drink or whatever works for you.

I said that it could be argued that way because of the wording of the rule. I didn't say that I believe that to be the case. I actually contend that exactly what you say is how the rule should be interpreted.

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by Jim Bob

Kentucky shooting a free throw, leading by three, a few seconds left in the game. Kentucky player leaves the lane almost exactly at the same time the official lets go of the ball to throw it to the shooter. Lane violation called. Mississippi State ties game, then goes on to win in OT.

ESPN commentators argue over whether or not it's the right call, spirit vs. letter of the rule, etc. etc.

What do you guys think?

Thats why it is so important to take your time to administer the FT. I double and tripple check to make sure all players are in place, after about 5 bounces of the ball before I bounce it to the player. NFHS needs to also clarify the ruling of at the disposal of the free thrower. Once place it says bounced and in another it says bounced and caught.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

NFHS needs to also clarify the ruling of at the disposal of the free thrower. Once place it says bounced and in another it says bounced and caught.

Really? I don't have my books here, so I can't check. It's been on tests in the past, and the answer is clearly "caught" (or placed on the floor).

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Really? I don't have my books here, so I can't check. It's been on tests in the past, and the answer is clearly "caught" (or placed on the floor).

Yep, I remember reading it. They need to clarify. I would think at the disposal would be caught and secured by the player.

[JoeTheRef]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Really? I don't have my books here, so I can't check. It's been on tests in the past, and the answer is clearly "caught" (or placed on the floor).

I have an NFHS rulebook at my desk and Rule 8:1 ART1 and Caseplay 8:1:1 Sit A specifically says the ball is placed at the disposal of the free thrower when it is bounced by the administering official.