Need some help on a free throw situation.

[NURef]

I know this has been covered before but I couldn't find this situation in my book...HS summer game.

White is shooting first FT of a 1 & 1 and black moves during shot for violation. White makes free throw but commits violation in the act of shooting (crosses FT line). The violations did not occur exactly at the same time but both officials blew their whistles after the made basket. The lead caught black's violations and the trail caught the shooter's violation.

I'm thinking AP but some officals claim you would shoot the 1 & 1 again? AP sounds right, but I'm still pretty new. FYI - The officials actually awarded a point for the FT and then shot the second free throw...claiming that the initial act of black (two players switched positions) threw-off the shooter? That doesn't seem right...Thanks.

[just another ref]

Penalize both violations. Go to the arrow.

Penalties 9-1-4-b

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by NURef

I'm thinking AP but some officals claim you would shoot the 1 & 1 again? AP sounds right, but I'm still pretty new. FYI - The officials actually awarded a point for the FT and then shot the second free throw...claiming that the initial act of black (two players switched positions) threw-off the shooter? That doesn't seem right...Thanks.

Not sure how a defender violating could cause a shooter to cross the FT line.

No dice. No disconcertion. Double violation. AP.

[pizanno]

Cancel the FT and go to AP.

Other observations:

* Trail should whistle immediately when shooter violates, and not just after a successful FT.

* Lead shouldn't have blown their whistle at all. Delayed violation mechanic, then drop it after the successful FT.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Not sure how a defender violating could cause a shooter to cross the FT line.

No dice. No disconcertion. Double violation. AP.

While it is uncommon, it is possible....B4 leaning in loses balance and, in an attempt to not fall into the lane, flails his arms and makes a lot of noise before falling into the lane. I'll consider that disconcertion....even if it was not deliberate.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

While it is uncommon, it is possible....B4 leaning in loses balance and, in an attempt to not fall into the lane, flails his arms and makes a lot of noise before falling into the lane. I'll consider that disconcertion....even if it was not deliberate.

Still, that doesn't wipe out the requirement of the FT shooter not stepping over the line before the ball hits the rim. Now, if A3 enters the lane too early, then yes, you could judge B4's action as the cause.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Still, that doesn't wipe out the requirement of the FT shooter not stepping over the line before the ball hits the rim. Now, if A3 enters the lane too early, then yes, you could judge B4's action as the cause.

Sure it can. If you feel that a defender's actions led to the shooter commiting a violation, only the defender's violation is penalized.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

While it is uncommon, it is possible....B4 leaning in loses balance and, in an attempt to not fall into the lane, flails his arms and makes a lot of noise before falling into the lane. I'll consider that disconcertion....even if it was not deliberate.

I'm with the rest of you guys here, and would call a double violation then use the AP arrow, but Camron has a legitimate point.

If the official does deem that something done by an opponent qualifies as disconcertion, then any violation by the shooter will only be considered in deciding if a legal goal is scored, but otherwise not penalized. So in the situation at hand, the FT cannot count as it was not legally scored due to the shooter crossing the FT line, but if the official deemed the defender to have disconcerted, then a substitute throw would be awarded. Essentially, administering the 1 & 1 over again would be the right way to handle it in that specific case.

The officials on the game cannot possibly have been correct, no matter what they called, since they scored a FT that was illegally made.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Sure it can. If you feel that a defender's actions led to the shooter commiting a violation, only the defender's violation is penalized.

Camron,
As I just posted above, the shooter's violation must also be penalized if the goal is made. You can't count an illegally scored FT. So BadNews is correct that disconcertion doesn't eliminate the requirement that the thrower not cross the line.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Camron,
As I just posted above, the shooter's violation must also be penalized if the goal is made. You can't count an illegally scored FT. So BadNews is correct that disconcertion doesn't eliminate the requirement that the thrower not cross the line.

In general, that would be true....disconcertion, shot, shooter rushes in, made/missed, both violations called.

But if, in a game, I see a defender violate then deliberately do something to draw the shooter into the lane, the only violation I'm going to call is the one on the defender...it is not the spirit or intent of the rule to allow the defender to attempt to get the shooter to violate.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

In general, that would be true....disconcertion, shot, shooter rushes in, made/missed, both violations called.

But if, in a game, I see a defender violate then deliberately do something to draw the shooter into the lane, the only violation I'm going to call is the one on the defender...it is not the spirit or intent of the rule to allow the defender to attempt to get the shooter to violate.

OK, I realize we're in that difficult period where the only hope to work a game is AAU, camps, summer rec leagues and we're a good 3+ full months before scrimmages... but what could a defender possibly do that would draw the shooter into stepping over the line before he releases the ball (NFHS)?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

OK, I realize we're in that difficult period where the only hope to work a game is AAU, camps, summer rec leagues and we're a good 3+ full months before scrimmages... but what could a defender possibly do that would draw the shooter into stepping over the line before he releases the ball (NFHS)?

For once, I must say that you have asked an excellent question, and you even did so without being sanctimonius.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

For once, I must say that you have asked an excellent question, and you even did so without being sanctimonius.

Wish I could return the compliment.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Sanctimonius.

Do we really need these $10.00 words?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

OK, I realize we're in that difficult period where the only hope to work a game is AAU, camps, summer rec leagues and we're a good 3+ full months before scrimmages... but what could a defender possibly do that would draw the shooter into stepping over the line before he releases the ball (NFHS)?

I was actually thinking about after the release but before it hits the rim but before the release works too....

Push/Pull the shooter....or fake doing so causing the shooter to step out of the way and into the lane.

(added) Why would someone do this? Probably the same reason Billy Gillespie instructed one of his players to goaltend a FT....in an attempt to get an advantage.

Situation: 10 seconds remaining...A1 on the line for two after being fouled while shooting....and not in the bonus. B4 accidentally steps in early. In order to ensure that A1 doesn't get 3 chances for 2 shots, B4 lets A1 release then pulls A1 into the lane. What do we have? By Nevs. interp, we call both violations....on B4 and A1 (since A1 was in the lane before the ball hit), wipe the bucket, probably a foul on B4, and award a substitute throw, .