NEW Case Book play 2.10.1 Situation A

[Nevadaref]

For the record, I believe that the case play is a mistake. The fact that I read it and said WTF is the very reason that I posted it.

I contend that Team B rebounding a missed FT attempted by a player from Team A is definitely a change of team possession.
I would award the 2nd FT with the lane empty and then resume from the POI, which would be a throw-in for Team B near mid-court.

[Scrapper1]

Personally, I like the philosophy of "the ball was dead, even though the players thought it was live". It makes it a little harder to swallow in this case, though, when the officials "state and administer" the wrong number of free throws. That means that even the officials believed the ball was live.

Frankly, I like the ruling; but I don't think it actually follows the rule.

[eg-italy]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Personally, I like the philosophy of "the ball was dead, even though the players thought it was live". It makes it a little harder to swallow in this case, though, when the officials "state and administer" the wrong number of free throws. That means that even the officials believed the ball was live.

Frankly, I like the ruling; but I don't think it actually follows the rule.

What if team B had scored before the recognition of the error? Say that the error is discovered after the basket and before the ball is live for team A's throw in.

Ciao