Need some help on a free throw situation.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

They don't need to...if the violation is to be called as you suggest, they kill the made shot if it is made forcing the shooter to reshoot....if missed, they've lost nothing.

Except for the Intentional Personal Foul which was just called against them if the offender made contact on the play or if you are claiming that the defensive violation is done without contact, yet it still somehow causes the shooter to cross the line AFTER the release of the ball, but BEFORE it contacts the ring or backboard or enters the goal (which is a scenario that I can't fathom actually taking place), then besides the substitute throw for disconcertion an official may consider an unsporting technical foul as well per an NFHS ruling. However, the FT attempt still cannot count if made.

Quite simply, Camron, you are insisting on counting a goal that was illegally made. That's just plain wrong. There is nothing else to say about it.

What you are advocating is the same as counting a basket when the ball was on the ring and a player intentionally slapped the backboard to cause it to fall off. You may feel that the "right" or fair thing to do is to credit the goal, but the rules of the game don't allow it. The team gets other compensation, in this case that comes in the form of two FTs from a technical foul.

Sorry, partner, but there are clear rules about how points are scored and the officials must enforce them. Doing otherwise is unacceptable no matter how "right" or in the spirit of the game you think it is.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Except for the Intentional Personal Foul which was just called against them if the offender made contact on the play
.

Who said anything about it being intentional....could have been inadvertant....and possible incidental.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

What you are advocating is the same as counting a basket when the ball was on the ring and a player intentionally slapped the backboard to cause it to fall off. You may feel that the "right" or fair thing to do is to credit the goal, but the rules of the game don't allow it. The team gets other compensation, in this case that comes in the form of two FTs from a technical foul.

Sorry, partner, but there are clear rules about how points are scored and the officials must enforce them. Doing otherwise is unacceptable no matter how "right" or in the spirit of the game you think it is.

Choosing to ignore a potential infraction is far different than penalizing something that is legal or calling something that never occured. Do you call a 3 second violation EVERY time when a player is in the lane for 3 seconds?

[Adam]

If B1 pulls A1 (or any Ax player) into the lane, I'm simply calling the foul. The spirit and intent of the rules is clear that they are designed to prevent one team from benefiting from this play. By disallowing the freethrow, B has benefited from an underhanded tactic.
Shot counts, intentional foul on B1, two extra shots for A1, pull everyone off the lane as A will get their throwin under the basket.

[Raymond]

In the original scenario defender violates and then A1 violates by entering the lane after releasing the shot. That's a double violation, go to AP arrow.

I fail to see how disconcertion would cause a shooter to enter too early. Camron has added all kinds of variables to justify his initial answer.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

In the original scenario defender violates and then A1 violates by entering the lane after releasing the shot. That's a double violation, go to AP arrow.

I fail to see how disconcertion would cause a shooter to enter too early. Camron has added all kinds of variables to justify his initial answer.

To rule correctly, you have to know why A1 entered the lane...you can assume he did so on his own but that is merely an assumption.

I didn't add "variables" to justify my answer...my original answer was correct as it was and I stand by it. I said that while it was uncommon, I could imagine scenarios that would cause me to ignore a violation by the shooter. I was asked for examples of such situations and provided them. I made a general statement to cover all posibilities rather than a specific statement that had holes in it.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Camron:

I hope that my defense of your position is not the kiss of death to your position. Therefore: NFHS R9-S1, Penalty 4c states: "If there is a violation first by the free-thrower's opponent followed by the free thrower or a teammate and a violation by the free thrower follows disconcertion by an opponent, a substitute free throw shall be awarded." This penalty would imply that Camron is correct in scoring the free throw in the original play if in the judgement of the official there was disconcertion.

MTD, Sr.