Re: Just a thought.
 

BkbBallRef and JR are wrong on this play.

The T made a mistake by sounding his whistle to soon, but the violation does not disappear. A1 gets three to make two (remember that rule in the NBA). The correct procedure is for the T and the L to give the delayed dead ball signal while A1 is shooting his first free throw. If the first free throw is successful then A1 only gets one more free throw. If the first free throw is not, then A1 gets two more free throws.

Bart's rule reference applies to both NCAA Men's/Women's as well as NFHS. Why, there is nothing in either rules codes that differ that would not allow a different interpretation. This logic goes back to when the NBCUSC was replaced by the NFHS and NCAA Rules Committees, and the casebook plays of the NBCUSC was accepted by both Committees.

Bart, Is there a correct way to handle it according to the questionnaire you referenced? All I know is this happened to me once and I don't have to worry about it because it will never happen again. 7th grade game a couple of years ago, I am lead and see a kid on my side of the lane but in the second from the top spot step out and tap the kid nearest the shooter to get him to move, this after the shooter has the ball. I believe the kid was about to comply and, because of the level, blow the play dead and tell them to switch. My thinking was to avoid a double violation in this instance which would have negated a free throw because of something initiated by the defense, but of course, the coach was irate and started to yell at my partner to give him three free throws. Which I did not, and still would probably not do, though I can see the logic of giving him an extra if he missed the first.

Re: Re: Just a thought.
 

BkbBallRef and JR are wrong on this play.

The T made a mistake by sounding his whistle to soon, but the violation does not disappear. A1 gets three to make two (remember that rule in the NBA). The correct procedure is for the T and the L to give the delayed dead ball signal while A1 is shooting his first free throw. If the first free throw is successful then A1 only gets one more free throw. If the first free throw is not, then A1 gets two more free throws.

Bart's rule reference applies to both NCAA Men's/Women's as well as NFHS. Why, there is nothing in either rules codes that differ that would not allow a different interpretation. This logic goes back to when the NBCUSC was replaced by the NFHS and NCAA Rules Committees, and the casebook plays of the NBCUSC was accepted by both Committees. [/B][/QUOTE]Mark,FEd R6-7-5 says that the ball is dead when an official's whistle is blown.This case is not one of the exceptions listed.How can you award a point on a FT made with a dead ball?Obviously you can't!The rules,as written,won't allow it.Tony had the right call.

Re: Re: Re: Just a thought.
 

Mark,FEd R6-7-5 says that the ball is dead when an official's whistle is blown.This case is not one of the exceptions listed.How can you award a point on a FT made with a dead ball?Obviously you can't!The rules,as written,won't allow it.Tony had the right call. [/B][/QUOTE]


Who said anything about awarding any points. We are talking about awarding substitute free throws.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Just a thought.
 

Who said anything about awarding any points. We are talking about awarding substitute free throws. [/B][/QUOTE]Re-read your post above.How can you have a successful FT with a dead ball?It's impossible under the rules.R6-7-5 is very explicit.This can never be a delayed dead ball.It is dead immediately,and you can't score with a dead ball.If you want further proof,read Casebook 6-7-5 SituationA.You simply cancel any activity after the inadvertent whistle,and re-shoot the original FT.That is the substitute throw that you award.

Re: Re: Just a thought.
 

Why do I have to be lumped up in this. I did not agree with Tony, nor did I disagree with him. I just said that this was a NCAA Women's ruling which does not apply necessarily to NF Rules. Then I asked for a NF Ruling on the issue too. Unless we have a NF Ruling, we cannot say this is the proper way to handle this under NF Rules.

I think people on this forum love to blame or point out the rights and wrong of people, rather than just focusing on what a person said. I do not have an answer unless I can find one according the casebook or rulebook.

Peace

The OFFICIAL NF Ruling
 

Read ALL of 6.7.5

The situation - After A1 has the ball, B1 commits a lane violation. The official inadvertently sounds his whistle:
(a) before A1 starts his shooting motion
(b) After the ball is released
(c) During A1's motion, but before the ball is released.

Ruling: (a) and (c) - ball becomes dead immediately (b) - ball is dead when the free throw ends. "Because B1 violated, in all cases, a substitute throw is awarded if the free-throw attempt by A1 is unsuccessful."

Of course, now we get to debate to which FTA the rule is referring! :p

Re: The OFFICIAL NF Ruling
 

Mark,I was aware of the last sentence that you highlighted.That is why I stated that the substitute FT replaces the original FT.The whole play is just Basketball Rules 101.The FT is unsuccessful because the referee killed the FT when he blew his whistle.R4-20-3 covers that,too.The original FT ends when the ball becomes dead.You then simply award a substitute FT under R6-7-5,not 2 substitute FT's. R5-1-1 states that you can only score with a live ball,also.What MTDSr is proposing goes against those basic tenets.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Apr 8th, 2002 at 04:32 AM]

Am i missing something here. Didn't Mark Dexter just site the case play for NF(6.7.5) and i sited the case play for ncaa. This case play says the player gets two to make one(because it happends to be the second shot). If it is the 1st. shot then it would be a possible three to make two if the player misses the 1st. shot. Are you concerned about the exact words?

Re: Re: The OFFICIAL NF Ruling
 

No one is awarding two substitute free throws. A1 never got the chance to attempt his first free throw because the T sounded an inadvertent whistle instead of a delayed deadball whistle for B1's free throw violation. A1 still gets to attempt his first free throw but with the officials showing the delayed deadball signal. If A1's free throw is successful we go on to the second free throw. If A1's first free throw is not successful then he gets a substitute free throw followed by the second free throw. Hence, three to make two.

I do not have my rules books in front of me but the NFHS Casebook play involves a timeout, and the NCAA A.R. deals with this play directly. But the logic applied to both plays is the same. Team B cannot benefit from its free throw violation because of the timeout request by Team A (NFHS Casebook Play) or the inadvertent whistle by the T (NCAA A.R.).

Re: Re: Just a thought.
 

Mark, there seems to be a lot of disagreement about this play, and to be honest, I'm not sure where I stand on it. But even if your interpretation is correct, your above statement is not technically correct. Even if you allow A1 to reshoot the first free throw with the delayed violation in effect, it's not a true 3-to-make-2 situation. If A1 makes the first FT then the violation is no longer "in play", so to speak; so he only gets one more, even if the second one is missed. In other words, the delayed violation only applies to the first FT, right? So once it's made, he doesn't get the benefit of a possible replacement throw on the second attempt.

It's more of a 2-to-make-1-then-1. :)

Chuck

Re: Re: Re: Just a thought.
 

The NBA's 3 for 2 rule was actually a bonus rule (like 1 and 1) in NFHS/NCAA. But the effect is the same in the posted play whether it is 2 for 1 or 3 for 2.

Everyone should also keep in mind, that even if DeNucci is correct about the rule in general, this particular shooter in this particular situation made the first shot, so he should not have been awarded a third. What if he had made the last (third) shot?!?!?

Re: Re: Re: Re: Just a thought.
 

I do remember that the NBA used the 3-to-make-2 bonus rule for a while. I think it only lasted one season, but I could easily be wrong about that.

But my point in my previous post was that the effect is definitely not the same in the posted play whther it's 2-for-1 or 3-for-2. If it's a 3-to-make-2 situation, then the shooter could still receive 3 shots altogether even after making the first shot. (He could miss the second shot and receive a replacement for that one.)

However, in the posted play, if the shooter makes the first shot, then he can only receive a maximum of 2 shots. If he makes the first shot, the replacement FT (due to the delayed violation before the first shot) cannot be "carried over" to apply to the second shot.

That was my only point in my previous post. Does it make more sense that way?

Chuck

Not that it makes any difference, Julie, but you assume that he made the first one. All rgaudreau said was that he missed the third one, didn't say anything about the first two.