NEW Case Book play 2.10.1 Situation A

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

For those who have the 2008-09 Case Book, do you think that the NFHS messed up the ruling on this one or that they are considering the ball to have remained dead since it should have and thus no team control ever occurred?

Brief summary:
A1 is fouled and entitled to 2 FTs. Officials state and administer 1 and 1. The first attempt is unsuccessful. B4 rebounds and passes to B2 near midcourt. The error is recognized at this time during the live ball.
NFHS ruling: Stop play and correct the error by allowing A1 his 2nd FT attempt WITH PLAYERS ON THE LANE and play resumes from the FT.

Rationale: The rebound and passing by Team B "constitutes no change in team possession."

NevadaRef:

I am leaning toward your position that the NFHS screwed the pooch (as our baseball brethern would say) in the play. I never liked this change in the Correctable Error section of the rules. I have always taken the position that treating the correction as a Point-of-Interuption was more logical; just stop the game, make the correction, and resume play from the point-of-interruption. BUT, NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! (Sorry John Belushi where ever you are.) Some people (for the sake of argument, let us say that Team A had gotten the rebound in the play in the OP) said that it is not fair for Team A to shoot the free throw and then keep the ball. Too bad, That's life ("that's what all the people say. You're riding high in April, Shot down in May. But I know I'm gonna change that tune, When I'm back on top, back on top in June." Thank you Francis Albert where ever you are. I can't wait to use a Jimmy Durante reference so I can say "Good night Mrs. Calabash, where ever you are." ) Anyway, I digress, because I am off my meds.

The ironic thing about this play is that the idea of team and player possession has been around for over 50 years but only team control and player control have been defined in the rules.

Have a good one everybody.

MTD, Sr.