The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon Sep 24, 2007, 01:58pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle
Still alive + dead = dead.
Could the ball considered in a state of half-life then?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon Sep 24, 2007, 02:09pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinski
Could the ball considered in a state of half-life then?
Now we have to bring carbon-dating into the equation? I'm not qualified for this stuff.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon Sep 24, 2007, 02:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
Now we have to bring carbon-dating into the equation? I'm not qualified for this stuff.
Yes, I've heard that most of your dates are not with carbon-based life forms.

Oh -- new case 4.19.8C provides an example of a double foul that does not cause the ball to become dead (even thought the "offensive" part of the double foul would normally cause the ball to become dead). It's not definitive to the OP, though.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Sep 24, 2007, 02:28pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: In a little pink house
Posts: 5,289
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins
Yes, I've heard that most of your dates are not with carbon-based life forms.

Oh -- new case 4.19.8C provides an example of a double foul that does not cause the ball to become dead (even thought the "offensive" part of the double foul would normally cause the ball to become dead). It's not definitive to the OP, though.
Since I will not have the new case book for a couple more weeks, would you be kind enough to post this case? I would like to see it, even if it's not really definitive to the OP.
__________________
"It is not enough to do your best; you must know what to do, and then do your best." - W. Edwards Deming
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon Sep 24, 2007, 02:42pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Deer Park, TX
Posts: 502
Quote:
Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle
Since I will not have the new case book for a couple more weeks, would you be kind enough to post this case? I would like to see it, even if it's not really definitive to the OP.
4.19.8 Sit C: A1 drives for a try and jumps and releases the ball. Contact occurs between A1 and B1 ater the release and before airborne shooter A1 returns one foot to the floor. One official calls a blocking foul on B1 and the other official calls a charge foul on A1. The try is successful. RULING: Even though airborne shooter A1 committed a charging foul, it is not a player-control foul because the two fouls result in a double personal foul. The double foul does not cause the ball to become dead on the try and the goal is scored. Play is resumed at the point of interruption, which is a throw-in for Team B from anywhere along the end line.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon Sep 24, 2007, 02:57pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
I don't think this case play works here, as Bob indicated it might not.
1. In the OP, the ball has not been released. In the case play, it has.
2. If the ball had been released for the free throw, there's no question it should count.
3. Since the question is what happens when there's a double foul between B1 and A2 after A1 has started his shooting motion but before it's released, I think the differences from the case play negate its usefulness on this.
4. The case play is using the fact that the only thing that can cause a released try to become dead before it is naturally completed is a player control foul. Since the free throw situation does not involve a differentiation of player control foul from team control foul, it's not relevant.

Unless something specifically states otherwise, I have to think the foul by a teammate causes the ball to become dead unless the try has already been released.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon Sep 24, 2007, 03:19pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
4. The case play is using the fact that the only thing that can cause a released try to become dead before it is naturally completed is a player control foul.
Doesn't a violation by a team mate of the shooter cause a released ball for a try to become dead as well? Not trying to nit pick, just clarifying.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Mon Sep 24, 2007, 02:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: In a little pink house
Posts: 5,289
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins
Yes, I've heard that most of your dates are not with carbon-based life forms.
Are you suggesting that it goes further than six pack of beer and a chicken?
__________________
"It is not enough to do your best; you must know what to do, and then do your best." - W. Edwards Deming
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon Sep 24, 2007, 02:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Deer Park, TX
Posts: 502
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins
Yes, I've heard that most of your dates are not with carbon-based life forms.

Oh -- new case 4.19.8C provides an example of a double foul that does not cause the ball to become dead (even thought the "offensive" part of the double foul would normally cause the ball to become dead). It's not definitive to the OP, though.
In my feeble mind 4.19.8D seems more related; however, this op states "in the act of shooting" where this case play clearly states "has possession and is about to attempt..." In this case play it is POI and resume with FT. But does being in the Act of Shooting change anything with a double foul?
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Mon Sep 24, 2007, 02:58pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins
Yes, I've heard that most of your dates are not with carbon-based life forms.
I think "most" is a bit strong here, Bob.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Mon Sep 24, 2007, 02:28pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 277
To calculate whether the ball will be considered “dead” or not, apply this simple formula…

t = [ ln (Nf/No) / (-0.693) ] x t1/2

where ln is the natural logarithm, Nf/No is the percent of carbon-14 in the ball compared to the amount in living tissue ( say JR?), and t1/2 is the half-life of carbon-14 (5,700 years).

If T is greater that 0, the ball is not dead.

Of course, you need to do this calculation fairly quickly and then blow the whistle accordingly or the coach might nag you for a late whistle.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


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
foul during free throw just another ref Basketball 7 Tue Oct 17, 2006 12:51pm
Double Violation on free throw Largent Basketball 11 Fri Jan 06, 2006 04:08pm
Double foul on throw-in clarification blindzebra Basketball 2 Thu Dec 08, 2005 01:15pm
Question about double violation on free throw Damian Basketball 10 Sat Sep 27, 2003 05:14pm
Free Throw/Double Violation? OK Ref Basketball 5 Mon Jan 28, 2002 06:33am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:04pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1