A couple of observations:

If the touch by a teammate is so slight that one cannot see that the ball was redirected, how often will be able to say with certainty that the ball was touched at all?

If the ball is in its downward flight, it obviously can't count. If it's above the rim, it's goaltending. If it's below the rim, or otherwise has no chance to go in, 4-4, it is certain the try is unsuccessful, and thus, ended.

If a teammate inadvertently touches A1's try while it is on the way up,
I don't know, because I can't even imagine it.

When you get on in years, you'll be known far and wide as an OOOO.

You're calling goaltending on the offense? I realize that the violation is not defined strictly in terms of the defense, but I don't think I've ever seen this called.

IMO, this is a vestige from (or is it "of?") when the offense could commit goaltending on a FT. When that was removed (becaause entering the lane would make the ball dead and the touching would be ignored), the GT definition could /should have been changed.

On the OP:

If the defense touches the ball, the try doesn't end.

If the offense touches the ball, then I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to the defense and 99.996% of the time ruling that the try ended. Since the OP *specifically says* that the touch was unintentional, then the OP falls in the .004% that's left.

This is a great point NCAAREF. The only excuse I have is that it was my first scrimmage of the year, and my partner was another very experienced official so I didn't question what he was doing. The bottom line is that it never should have gotten as far as it did and we should have decided before any free throws were attempted what was going to happened. I'm just glad it happened in a scrimmage and not a game!

Maybe I missed it somewhere in this thread, but did you state if the shooter was fouled in the air? The act of shooting includes an airborne shooter. Therefore if he was airborne and was blocked on his way down, the try had not ended.

That said, 4.41.5 describes a tap as "an attempt to diirect" the ball. Was this the case? To me, if the initial shot hit off the back of the hand of A5 then went into the basket, it's an "and 1".

If it's a deliberate tap, then I would consider it the same as a "pass and crash" situation and if the ball had left A5's hand ("tap") before the block, then count the basket and award a common foul. If the ball had not left A5's hand before the crash, then ball dead. IMO.

Unfortunately, your opinion in red is wrong. :( The rest of your post is fine.:)
You are failing to acknowledge that continuous motion applies to both a try and a tap, and furthermore comes into play when there is foul by the defense against ANY opponent, not just the one attempting the try or tap. So the ball does not have to leave A5's hand before the blocking foul, but A5 only has to touch the ball to start the tapping motion prior to the contact of the blocking foul against his teammate.

Here are the relevant rule references:

2004-05 Major Editorial Changes
4-11-1 Clarified that continuous motion applies to a try or tap for a field goal and free throws, when there is a foul by any defensive player, not just a defensive foul on the shooter.

From the 2007-08 NFHS Rules Book:
4-11-1 . . . Continuous motion applies to a try or tap for field goals and free throws, but it has no significance unless there is a foul by any defensive player during the interval which begins when the habitual throwing movement starts a try or with the touching on a tap and ends when the ball is clearly in flight.


CONTINUOUS MOTION
6.7 COMMENT: If an opponent fouls after A1 has started to throw for goal, A1 is permitted to complete the customary arm movement; and, if A1 is pivoting or stepping when A1 or a teammate is fouled, A1 may complete the usual foot or body movement in any activity, as long as A1 is still holding the ball. If A1 starts a dribble, the “continuous motion” immediately ends. These privileges are granted only when the usual throwing motion has started before the foul occurs. The continuous-motion rule applies to a free-throw try as well as to a field-goal try or tap for goal. However, in a tap for goal, the motion does not begin until the ball is touched. The “continuous-motion” provision does not apply to batting or tipping the ball during rebounding or a jump ball. In these cases, A1 is not considered as being in the act of trying or tapping for goal. If an opponent commits a foul during this type of action before the ball is in flight, the foul causes the ball to become dead immediately. In rebounding, the ball is not always batted. It might be caught in one hand and then thrown into the basket with a snap of the wrist or fingers or touched and tapped toward the basket. Under these circumstances, an official is justified in ruling that it is a try or tap instead of a bat. Continuous motion is of significance only when there is a personal or technical foul by B after the trying or tapping motion by A1 is started and before the ball is in flight. It includes any body, foot or arm motion normally used in trying for a field goal or free throw, and it ends when the ball leaves the hand(s) on the try or tap. (4-11)
6.7 SITUATION C: Under what circumstances does the ball remain live when a foul occurs just prior to the ball being in flight during a try or tap? RULING: The ball would ordinarily become dead at once, but it remains live if the foul is by the defense, and this foul occurs after A1 has started the try or tap for goal and time does not expire before the ball is in flight. The foul by the defense may be either personal or technical and the exception to the rule applies to field goal tries and taps and free-throw tries. (4-11; 4-41-1)
6.7 SITUATION D: A1 has started a try for a goal (is in the act of shooting), but the ball is not yet in flight when the official blows the whistle for B2 fouling A2. A1's try is successful. RULING: Score the goal by A1. If Team A is in the bonus, A2 will shoot free throws. If not, Team A will have a designated spot throw-in nearest to where the foul occurred. COMMENT: The foul by the defense need not be on the player in the act of shooting for continuous motion principles to apply. (6-7 Exception c)

You have dismissed my premise without understanding it. Your whole research is based on an assumption that it was still a try. I clearly stated that if A5 (the other offensive player) made a redirection with an intentional and distinct tap, the initial try was either ended or was no more than a PASS. Like an alley-oop. It would be a judgment but would pass muster on two counts: 1) it was redirected because it had no chance of being successful - ergo the try had ended, and/or 2) the foul occurred after the ball was clearly in flight which ends continual motion.

I suggest you try to understand the position of the other poster better before declaring him wrong. :(

I'm not sure I follow, Ralph. The "try" and the "act of shooting" are different things.

You can definitely have an airborne shooter (and a foul on or by the airborne shooter) after the try has ended.

Go back and read his post, Ralph. He specifically stated the only part of your post that was incorrect was what he highlighted in red. The tap does not need to leave A5's hand, in only has to have been started. He was specifically and only addressing that aspect of your post.

I understand the difference and that is my point - they are two different issues. I am just tossing out a thought. Let's say A1 jumps and shoots. Before A1 comes down and before he is fouled, A5 redirects the ball with a tap. After the tap occurs, the airborne shooter A1 is then fouled by B1.

Maybe that was not the OP dilemma. Maybe the shot hit A5's hand but it was not a tap. Dunno.

Assuming the first scenario, I may be wrong but here is what I think. The second A5 tapped, the official could assume the initial shot was unsuccessful since it had to be redirected by A5. Therefore the initial try had ended. However, until A1 returned to the floor he was still in the act of shooting. Since the A5 tap had started before the foul, the foul by B1 does not make the ball dead. A5 scores. A1 was in the act of shooting when fouled since he was still an airborne shooter. Score the basket and give A1 two free throws.

Now, I can't imagine this happenning, but what is wrong with that logic. :confused:

Nothing is wrong with that. I think that it is completely correct. A case of strange, but true. :)

However, notice that what you wrote in this post and I have highlighted in blue. Is the exact opposite of what you wrote before and to which I responded with a correction. Your statement in back in post #51 was indeed wrong. :( The premise of my earlier post was just fine. A tap for goal started with a touch does not become dead due to a foul by an opponent and to score the ball does NOT have to have left the tapper's hand at the time of the foul. You were mistaken about that point.

PS One will probably be awarding Team A FOUR FTs if this happens and is called correctly. :D

We are now on the same page. maybe I worded it poorly before, but always knew what I meant! :D

BTW since we all agree that A1 was an airborne shooter when fouled, the terminology above is also a slight inaccuracy. But since you're new here and not yet accustomed to our nitpicking, we'll give you a free pass on this one. ;)

Hey let's change this in just one way and consider another strange, but instructive sequence!

A1 jumps into the air to try for goal. B1 has obtained a legal guarding position on the floor prior to A1 going airborne. A1's try is clearly short and has fallen below the level of the ring when A5 taps it into the basket. The ball has left A5's hand on the tap BEFORE A1 crashes into B1 prior to returning to the floor.

How does one handle that scenario? ;)