A1 has pivot foot inside 3 point arc, and other foot outside the arc. A1 lifts the pivot foot to shoot, with other foot still outside the arc. Is this a 3 point attempt?

nope. both feet need to leave the floor from behind the 3 point arch for a try to be good for 3 points.

Yes, it is. And it doesn't matter which foot is the pivot foot.

If a player is in the air his/her position is determined by where he/she was when they became airborn. If one foot was on or inside the arch when the player goes airborn, the resulting try is worth 2 points.

He didn't say that he jumped.
He said that he lifted his pivot foot.
The other foot is still outside the 3 pt. arc.
If he shoots with the foot on the floor or if he now jumps off the non-pivot foot, we have a 3 pt. try.

i give him 3

I give him the three. Your position on th court is determined by where you last touched the court. Thus his one foot that is touching the florr is behind the arc.

TH,once he lifts his pivot foot,all he can do is shoot,pass or call a TO.If he shoots,isn't the original position of his pivot foot a part of the try then?I looked at R4-40-1 and R4-43-3a and put them together.I came up with the player starting his try with one foot inside the line-therefore,no 3.I could be convinced otherwise,though.:DThis is a good question.

Let's look at it this way. Player A1 has one foot in the FC, one foot in the BC, and is holding the ball. A1 picks up the foot in the BC, does a complete 360 on his FC (pivot) foot, then puts his non-pivot foot back down in the BC. Does anyone <b>not</b> have a BC violation.

In other words, A1's position is based on his foot in the FC, not the non-pivot foot. Apply the same situation above to the three point scenario, and I think you'd get more votes to count the 3.

Does the non pivot foot remain in the air??
 

or does he touch the floor while he is doing his 360? I would have BC violation if he touched in FC several times before sting it down in BC again. I think that no one would argue if it was counted as a 3, a 2 or it happened fast enough peolple would be yelling for a travel also....

Dan,I see where you're coming from.In the same situation as above,if A1 picks up his pivot foot in the FC, A1 is still legally in the BC,by definition.He still has to shoot,pass,or call a TO,though, before the pivot foot hits.If not,it's a travel-not a BC violation.I'm just not sure if you can ignore the fact that A1 started a shot,by rule,with one foot over the 3-point line.

I gotta go with the 3. If one foot is behind the arc, no matter which foot, and the player shoots with one foot on the floor or jumps off that foot, I've got a 3.

5-2-1
A successful try,.....from the field by a player who is located behind the team's own 19-foot, 9-inch line counts three points.

I believe this player is located behind the line. It's like Danvrapp said, if a player is stradling the division line with pivot in the BC, lifts his pivot, he's now in the FC. I don't think we can change the location of a player, based on whether he shoots or not.

Jurassic - Based on your reasoning above (which I agree with 100%!), sounds like A1 is behind the three point arc!

If he's still in the BC when he picks up the foot in the FC (which he is), then he should still be behind the three point arc when he picks up the foot inside the arc - same principle applies. Assuming that A1 doesn't shoot at roughly the same time the foot inside the arc comes off the floor, looks like a 3 to me.

BTW, what makes you say that "A1 started a shot, by rule, with one foot over the 3-point line?" I didn't know you had to have two feet on the floor to start a shot??? ;)

The problem I got with this,Tony,is that the player above in 5-2-1 was located with one foot over the line WHEN he started his try-i.e.he had one foot over the line when he started to shoot.I think you apply a different principle than BC/FC on this sitch.This is an interesting one!:DGotta go.I'll check in later,'cause I'm certainly not 100% sure on this.

I would give him 3.

That's a 3-pointer.

Z

No question---3.

3

Jurassic - Based on your reasoning above (which I agree with 100%!), sounds like A1 is behind the three point arc!

If he's still in the BC when he picks up the foot in the FC (which he is), then he should still be behind the three point arc when he picks up the foot inside the arc - same principle applies. Assuming that A1 doesn't shoot at roughly the same time the foot inside the arc comes off the floor, looks like a 3 to me.

BTW, what makes you say that "A1 started a shot, by rule, with one foot over the 3-point line?" I didn't know you had to have two feet on the floor to start a shot??? ;) [/B][/QUOTE]You don't have to have 2 feet on the floor to start a shot.In this case,though,A1 started his shot as soon as he lifted his pivot foot.R4-43-3a states that if you lift your pivot foot,legally all you can do is shoot or pass.The player in the case we are talking about definitely shot.Therefore,he had to start that try by lifting his pivot foot.If you now go to R4-40-1,that states the act of shooting begins simultaneously with the start of the try.Therefore,if you put them together,the shot started immediately when A1 lifted his pivot foot from it's location inside the line.That's why I'm saying that I think it's a 2.The lag time that BBref is talking about is what is making me say"I think" instead of "I know",though.:DI can see where he is coming from.Does the player immediately gain location behind the arc when he raise the pivot foot that was in front of the arc?Could be,but the shot had started,too,with the raising of the foot.
The difference between this sitch and your BC/FC scenario is that at the center line,a player is considered in the BC if he is straddling it.If he is straddling the arc instead,his location is deemed to be inside the arc,not behind it.As I said,I think there are 2 different concepts involved.

The Cases deal with a player lifting both feet simultaneously.

In the situation here, one foot stays planted behind the arc; I have a 3 pt. shot.

Say what???What cases are you referring to and what does that have to do with a player lifting a pivot foot while the other foot remains on the floor?There's no problem if both feet are lifted simultaneously.It's a 2 because one foot was inside the arc.

Jurassic, I have to admit you do have a good point. What about this; Lane violation, one foot in, one foot out. pick up the foot in the lane and the player is considered out of the lane. Do you think we can rule the 3 pointer the same as in the lane violation case?

I'd love to rule it the same way,Bart.That would make it a 2 under the same ruling above that says the player is still in the lane.Unfortunately,I don't really know if that concept can be applied either to this particular sitch.That damn Tony really got me thinking about this one!:DWhere's all the IAABO rules interpreters when you really need them!:D


[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Feb 5th, 2002 at 04:05 PM]

3Pt Shot!

Not quite. See 9.7B. This situation is interpreted as trying to evade the 3-second count, so the count continues until the foot in the lane touches somewhere out of the lane (we might not call it like that, but that is the case play).

Of course it is a three. How about this. One foot OOB, one foot in. Lifts foot OOB and catches ball - do you blow him OOB? Of course not.

If the player makes contact with an area of the court - then that is where the player is deemed to be, regardless of whether the contact is made with one, two, three feet or a nose.

If you signal this basket a 2 on my shot - you'd better back it up with a technical, cause you're gonna have to throw me out of the game.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
[B]Jurassic,

It's a 3 pointer.

..Mike (IAABO Member for a kazillion billion years)

P.S.: How the h*ll are ya? What's new?

Upon further review,it's a 3!
If the whole world tells you that you are full of sh!t,you should be smart enough to take an industrial size laxative.:D

The above example is like mixing Apples and Oranges.

This whole discussion hinges on the fact that the player was pivoting. You can't have possesion of the ball OOB with the pivot foot down. You would be OOB if your pivot foot was down out of bounds...just as you would be inside the arc if your pivot foot was down inside the arc. Therfore, lift the pivot foot...you must shoot or pass...you shoot, you just shot a two, ACCORDING TO JURASIC!

After saying all that, I don't agree with Jurasic. True, you lift your pivot foot you have to shoot...BUT, since your back foot is behind the arc, you are in 3 point land...3 point shot!

RD

Mark, do you think the "evade the rule" concerning the 3 seconds is out dated? Now that i think about it, I do believe most player do touch the foot down outside of the lane before going back. One thing is for sure, I would be missing a lot of action if i started watching this kind of 3 second action.

Probably. Obviously, no one (hopefully) will call A1 on a violation if his big toe is in the lane for 3.0001 seconds. However, if A2 has been fully in the lane for 8 seconds, and then only gets one foot out, and stays there for another, oh 20 seconds, call the violation.

I tend to miss a lot of 3-second violations because I'm concentrating on the action of bodies in the paint.