The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jun 01, 2007, 09:18pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
More GT questions with no restrictions on who can hijack the thread, DAN!!

1.So, if a B player goaltends a free throw, it's both a violation AND a technical? That's how it appears. If she goaltends the first of a one-and-one and the ball goes in anyway, A1 gets the bonus. But if B1 goaltends and the ball doesn't go in, does A1 get the bonus anyway? And they there is the T shots for any A players, right?

2. If A2 goaltends A1's free throw, it's NOT a technical? That seems weird. Basically from looking at 9.12 Sit B it looks like legalisticly speaking, A can't commit goaltending. "The ball becomes dead when the lane violation occurs and the goaltending is ignored." Interesting.

3. There is no GT on a throw-in since it can't be a try, but there could be BI. Correct?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jun 01, 2007, 09:21pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,614
1. Yes. Yes.

2. It's not a T because A can't goaltend.

3. Correct.
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott

"You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jun 01, 2007, 09:23pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
Quote:
Originally Posted by BktBallRef
1. Yes. Yes.

2. It's not a T because A can't goaltend.

3. Correct.
1. Thank you, thank you.

2. Thank you, and...

3. Thank you!
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jun 01, 2007, 09:33pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
Quote:
Originally Posted by rainmaker
2. If A2 goaltends A1's free throw, it's NOT a technical? That seems weird. Basically from looking at 9.12 Sit B it looks like legalisticly speaking, A can't commit goaltending. "The ball becomes dead when the lane violation occurs and the goaltending is ignored." Interesting.
It's confusing because the Penalty section in rule 9-12-2 says, "If the violation is at a team's own basket, no points can be scored, and the ball is awarded to the opponents for a throw-in from the designated out-of-bounds spot nearest the violation. [that's not the confusing part.] See 10-3-10 for additional penalty for goaltending during a free throw." Then 10-3-10 says, "...shall not goaltend during a free-throw" and the penalty is basically a technical foul. It doesn't differentiate between offensive and defensive. The only way to see that distinction clearly is to read the case book.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jun 01, 2007, 10:30pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally Posted by rainmaker
3. There is no GT on a throw-in since it can't be a try, but there could be BI. Correct?
I told you exactly that in the original fascist controlled thread without telling you why. You've apparently discovered the why.

Before we close the thread let's enjoy this together, shall we?

http://www.stupidvideos.us/video.asp...upid%20videos/
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jun 01, 2007, 11:13pm
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Before we close the thread let's enjoy this together, shall we?

http://www.stupidvideos.us/video.asp...upid%20videos/
Wow! A video for kids who want to grow up to be coaches!!!
__________________
Yom HaShoah
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jun 02, 2007, 12:22am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan_ref
I told you exactly that in the original fascist controlled thread without telling you why. You've apparently discovered the why.

Before we close the thread let's enjoy this together, shall we?

http://www.stupidvideos.us/video.asp...upid%20videos/
Okay, well, whatever.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jun 02, 2007, 03:32am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by rainmaker
1.So, if a B player goaltends a free throw, it's both a violation AND a technical? That's how it appears. If she goaltends the first of a one-and-one and the ball goes in anyway, A1 gets the bonus. But if B1 goaltends and the ball doesn't go in, does A1 get the bonus anyway? And they there is the T shots for any A players, right?

2. If A2 goaltends A1's free throw, it's NOT a technical? That seems weird. Basically from looking at 9.12 Sit B it looks like legalisticly speaking, A can't commit goaltending. "The ball becomes dead when the lane violation occurs and the goaltending is ignored." Interesting.

3. There is no GT on a throw-in since it can't be a try, but there could be BI. Correct?
1. Yes, both violation and a technical foul if the DEFENSE goaltends during a FT attempt. If done on the first attempt of a 1-1, it doesn't matter if the ball goes in or not. You know that the ball becomes dead at the time of the violation and that the point is awarded. The second FT attempt is then awarded due to the first one being credited.

2. Let's look at the definition of goaltending given in 4-22.

"Goaltending occurs when a player touches the ball during a field-goal try or tap while it is in its downward flight entirely above the basket ring level and has the possibility of entering the basket in flight, or an opponent of the free thrower touches the ball outside the cylinder during a free-throw attempt."

Does that tell you why it is not a T?

If you ever see a teammate of the FT shooter do this, then penalize with either 9-1-3 or 9-1-8. One of those two items must have happened. If 9-1-8 occurred, it happened first and is the controlling violation. However, if no one moved their feet beyond the plane (picture the FT shooter standing all the way over on the side such that a teammate standing in a marked-lane space could have his try hit his extended arms), I state that the thrower violated 9-1-3 because the try touched another player before entering or striking the ring, and 4-20-3 states that the FT ends when the ball touches another player.

3. Correct, and you got the proper reason!
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jun 02, 2007, 08:13pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally Posted by rainmaker
Okay, well, whatever.
Clever response
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jun 03, 2007, 02:35pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan_ref
Clever response
which is the sophisticated version of, "Good comeback, Potsie!"? That's me. Always on my toes.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jun 04, 2007, 01:12pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by rainmaker
It's confusing because the Penalty section in rule 9-12-2 says, "If the violation is at a team's own basket, no points can be scored, and the ball is awarded to the opponents for a throw-in from the designated out-of-bounds spot nearest the violation. [that's not the confusing part.] See 10-3-10 for additional penalty for goaltending during a free throw." Then 10-3-10 says, "...shall not goaltend during a free-throw" and the penalty is basically a technical foul. It doesn't differentiate between offensive and defensive. The only way to see that distinction clearly is to read the case book.
Juulie, remember that the players used to be allowed to enter the lane upon the release of the shot. In this case, goal tending by the offense was entirely possible. It explains why they state "if the violation is at a team's own basket...." Also, imagine a player with really long arms who is able to reach the hoop without crossing his feet into the lane....
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jun 04, 2007, 06:20pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
Juulie, remember that the players used to be allowed to enter the lane upon the release of the shot. In this case, goal tending by the offense was entirely possible. It explains why they state "if the violation is at a team's own basket...." Also, imagine a player with really long arms who is able to reach the hoop without crossing his feet into the lane....

Adam, would you please go read the definition provided in post #8.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I Didin't want to hijack the survey thread...but an observation Ignats75 Basketball 24 Tue Feb 20, 2007 01:56pm
Not to hijack so new thread scottk_61 Softball 7 Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:08pm
Shift Restrictions Smiley Football 5 Thu Sep 21, 2006 09:42pm
SP - Defensive position restrictions?? Robmoz Softball 1 Sat Jul 16, 2005 09:25am
Restrictions TRetzer Baseball 1 Tue May 11, 2004 07:31pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:32pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1