Last second shot & foul

[Mark Dexter]

I brought this up last year as a shot clock question, and I don't think we ever came to a consensus. For some reason, this popped back into my mind tonight as an end-of-quarter/game situation:

Clock shows a few seconds left in the period as A1 drives the lane and starts to go up for a shot. While A1 is in his shooting motion, but before he releases the shot, B1 fouls A1, and the official blows the whistle with time remaining on the clock. The clock does not stop, the horn sounds, then A1 releases the ball and (of course) the shot goes in.

Do you wave this off as after the horn? Do you say the horn never should have happened in the first place, and allow the shot? For NF officials, would you factor lag time into the equation?

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter
Do you wave this off as after the horn? Do you say the horn never should have happened in the first place, and allow the shot? For NF officials, would you factor lag time into the equation?

Yes, you wave off the shot if the clock was properly stopped, as lag time would definitely be an issue. If the there was one second on the clock when the whistle was blown, then the clock was stopped properly.

If there was, for example, 1.5 seconds left on the clock when the whistle blew, then the basket is good, and we would put .5 seconds back on the clock.

[w_sohl]

Why would you put time back on the clock, it is my understanding that human error (lag time) is part of the game to some degree.

[crew]

this is what i would do, though people may not agree.
nc2a-if i knew the foul occurred before expiration of time i would allow the basket, report the foul, then put time back on the clock. if i did not have definate knowledge of the correct time i would go to my partners and ask for help. if my partners did not know how much time to restore i would use common sense and an educated guess as to how much time to restore provided there was no technical equipment to go to(moniter, play by play, etc.)

in highschool there is a 1 sec. lag time to throw in the mix. this makes the situation very difficult. i would have to decide if the shot would have been released before the expiration of time.

1. if the player had just picked up his dribble and started his 2 step motion-then foul-then horn-then step,step shot-common sense would tell me that the shot would not have been released in time-i would report-wipe the made basket-award 2 freethrows.

2. if the shooter was in a jumpshot motion where the defender holds the shooter and causes him to hesitate his shot unnaturaly-then horn-then release-i would count the basket and award 1 free throw.(if the points scored or free throws awarded did not affect the outcome(situation 1 or 2) of the game-throw this philosophy bullsh1t out the window)

[devdog69]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter
I brought this up last year as a shot clock question, and I don't think we ever came to a consensus. For some reason, this popped back into my mind tonight as an end-of-quarter/game situation:

Clock shows a few seconds left in the period as A1 drives the lane and starts to go up for a shot. While A1 is in his shooting motion, but before he releases the shot, B1 fouls A1, and the official blows the whistle with time remaining on the clock. The clock does not stop, the horn sounds, then A1 releases the ball and (of course) the shot goes in.

Do you wave this off as after the horn? Do you say the horn never should have happened in the first place, and allow the shot? For NF officials, would you factor lag time into the equation?

By the sequencing MD gives the horn goes off before A1 releases the ball, so you cannot have a good basket irregardless of the other circumstances. Put A1 on the line, address the lag time issue as to whether to put time on the clock or not, and go on about your business.

[w_sohl]

Isn't lag time, to some reasonable degree, part of the game?

[w_sohl]

How do you put quotes???

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by w_sohl
Why would you put time back on the clock, it is my understanding that human error (lag time) is part of the game to some degree.

The rules only allow for 1 second of lag time. If the official has definitely knowledge that 1.5 seconds were on the clock, then he can put .5 seconds back on the clock. BTW, lag time is not human error. Lag time is reaction time.

Isn't lag time, to some reasonable degree, part of the game?

Yes, but only 1 second of lag time is allowed.

Originally posted by devdog69
By the sequencing MD gives the horn goes off before A1 releases the ball, so you cannot have a good basket irregardless of the other circumstances. Put A1 on the line, address the lag time issue as to whether to put time on the clock or not, and go on about your business.

Yes, you most certainly can have a good basket.

Mark's play, considering 1.5 seconds remaining at the foul
A1 begins his shooting motion.
B1 fouls.
L blows whistle. The clock is at 1.5 seconds.
The clock now has one second to stop.
The timer fails to properly stop the clock and the horn sounds.
The ball is released.
The shot goes.

The way the play should have happened
A1 begins his shooting motion.
B1 fouls.
L blows whistle. The clock is at 1.5 seconds.
The clock now has one second to stop.
The timer properly stops the clock with .5 seconds remaining.
The ball is released.
The shot goes.

You can't penalize A1 because the timer failed to properly stop the clock. The shot counts and .5 seconds should be put back on the clock.

Are you going to tell Coach A that the clock should have stopped, so we're going to put .5 seconds back on the clock but we're not going to count the basket? If the clock should have stopped and we're putting time back on the clock, then the horn never sounded. The basket has to count.

That is the proper way to handle it.

[devdog69]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

Yes, you most certainly can have a good basket.

Mark's play, considering 1.5 seconds remaining at the foul
A1 begins his shooting motion.
B1 fouls.
L blows whistle. The clock is at 1.5 seconds.
The clock now has one second to stop.
The timer fails to properly stop the clock and the horn sounds.
The ball is released.
The shot goes.

The way the play should have happened
A1 begins his shooting motion.
B1 fouls.
L blows whistle. The clock is at 1.5 seconds.
The clock now has one second to stop.
The timer properly stops the clock with .5 seconds remaining.
The ball is released.
The shot goes.

You can't penalize A1 because the timer failed to properly stop the clock. The shot counts and .5 seconds should be put back on the clock.

Are you going to tell Coach A that the clock should have stopped, so we're going to put .5 seconds back on the clock but we're not going to count the basket? If the clock should have stopped and we're putting time back on the clock, then the horn never sounded. The basket has to count.

That is the proper way to handle it. [/B]

I strongly disagree. No matter what, if the ball is not released before the horn goes off then I have no basket. I am not going to tell Coach B "because the whistle blew and the clock should have been stopped, player A1 has infinity to release the ball and the horn means nothing".

6-7 EXCEPTION: The ball does not become dead until the try or tap ends when:
3. A foul is committed by any opponent of a player who has started a try or tap for goal before the foul occurred, "provided time did not expire before the ball was in flight."

Just because the clock did not stop when it should have I am not going to afford him any more time to release the shot than he would have if the clock properly stopped. You are trying to say that A1 is fouled and it takes him more than 1.5 seconds to release a shot. I think this is a moot point because it most likely would have to occur with less than one second to go to be physically possible.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by devdog69

I strongly disagree. No matter what, if the ball is not released before the horn goes off then I have no basket. I am not going to tell Coach B "because the whistle blew and the clock should have been stopped, player A1 has infinity to release the ball and the horn means nothing".

The horn was not supposed to sound. If you put time back on the clock, then you're saying that the horn didn't sound. It never happened.

6-7 EXCEPTION: The ball does not become dead until the try or tap ends when:
3. A foul is committed by any opponent of a player who has started a try or tap for goal before the foul occurred, "provided time did not expire before the ball was in flight."

Time didn't expire if you put one second back on the clock.

Just because the clock did not stop when it should have I am not going to afford him any more time to release the shot than he would have if the clock properly stopped. You are trying to say that A1 is fouled and it takes him more than 1.5 seconds to release a shot. I think this is a moot point because it most likely would have to occur with less than one second to go to be physically possible.

If the clock properly stops, then he has until returns to the floor to release the shot. You are not affording "him any more time."

I'm not really addressing whether it's likely to happen or not. It is possible. If the clock isn't properly stopped, then you have to credit the basket. If you chose not to, all I can say is that it's your @ss, not mine.

[williebfree]

Originally posted by w_sohl
How do you put quotes???

Like this! " "

Seriously, look at the bottom of the individual posting that you want to "quote". There is a small Icon with the creatively-chosen word "quote". Click it and it should become apparent what you need to do next.

Good luck!

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by devdog69
so you cannot have a good basket irregardless of the other circumstances.

Arrghhh! Devdog, I apologize for this, but the "grammar police" in me just had to come out on this. There is no such word as "irregardless." The word is "regardless."

I only mention this not to "put anyone down", because certainly, I make enought mistakes myself, but only because I have a ref buddy who intentionally says this word all the time just to bug me.

Feel free to correct my posts at any time.

[ChuckElias]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark Padgett

Arrghhh! Devdog, I apologize for this, but the "grammar police" in me just had to come out on this. There is no such word as "irregardless." The word is "regardless."

Mark, although "regardless" is considered traditional usage, several dictionaries have begun listing "irregardless" as an alternative usage (with the same definition), due to its common use in recent years. I don't personally like it, but it is unfortunately creeping into everyday language.

"regardless" = "irregardless". That's kind of like "iterate" = "reiterate".

Chuck

[Mark Dexter]

Let me tell you, those dictionaries make me want to puke on more than just people's shoes!

"Hey! Who woulda thought that flammable and inflammable mean the same thing?" - Dr. Nick Riviera

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter


"Hey! Who woulda thought that flammable and inflammable mean the same thing?" - Dr. Nick Riviera

"Doesn't that mean the same thing? Like "flammable" and "inflammable"? Boy, I found that one out the hard way." -- Woody, from Cheers