NFHS Test Question: What Does it Mean?
 

I'm preparing for the NFHS exam and found some old NFHS exams online.

Here is a true/false question:

If the ball is to become dead when the last free throw of a penalty is unsuccessful, players shall not take positions along the free-throw lane.

The answer given is true.

What exactly is the question asking or dealing with? Does it mean AFTER the last free throw is unsuccessful? If so, what does the last part mean about taking positions along the free throw lane?

Think of it this way - can you think of any instance where even though the FT is unsuccessful, the ball will still be dead? Iow, the rebound doesn't matter?

The free throws are followed by another penalty (other free throws or a throw-in; for FIBA also the starting jump ball) or there's no time on the clock.

Ciao

Normally, on the last free throw of a set (one-and-one, two shots, three shots), the ball remains live on the miss, thus allowing the players to rebound.

However, if the possession following the free throws is predetermined (technical fouls, flagrant fouls, intentional fouls, free throws shot with time expired), it will become dead on the miss.

Consider the sequence of live ball/dead ball here.

Free throw.
1. Ball is dead.
2. Ball becomes live when shooter gets ball.
3. a) If basket is made, the ball becomes dead.
b) If basket is missed and no more shots follow, ball normally remains live.

It's the exceptions to 3b that are discussed in this question.

[QUOTE=Spence;538880]
If the ball is to become dead (no rebound on the miss) when the last free throw of a penalty is unsuccessful, players shall not take positions along the free-throw lane (lane lines are cleared like on a technical foul).
QUOTE]


Next to the answer key for that question, does it list where the rule can be found? If so, just look it up to get a better understanding of the rule.

So, the question is assuming that we already know that there is a predetermined outcome after the FTs such as the T/flagrant/intentiona/etc? Therefore, its asking "would the players in such a situation ever line up in the lanes?"

Actually, it's asking would the players <B>not</B> line up along the lane, but that's it. Sometimes the test questions are a little obtuse, but it makes sense once you figure out what they're trying to ask.

Yes, with the correction that M&M notes below. Twice he's beat me on this thread, so he's probably not getting any work done today.

You're right, I'm not. But if I tried to explain why, no one would believe me.

You're not watching Leave It To Beaver re-runs again are you?

I try not to, but sometimes it's just forced upon me.

Damn internet connections.

I know what you mean, sometimes you get things that just make you throw up a little in your mouth.

Spence, you're thinking too hard.

If the ball is to become dead when the last free throw of a penalty is unsuccessful, makes me ask "Okay, in what situations will the ball be dead if the last FT is missed? Let's see, the ball would be dead if the FT is for an intentional, flagrant or technical foul."

Players shall not take positions along the free-throw lane. "No, they don't, so that means the answer is true."

This *live* ball description, merely because [5-1-1] a ball must be "live" in order to be a goal is just so wrong.
I propose the "live" ball description in thses cases be changed to "latently live".

Laughably lame?