What do you think of this ruling?
 

A1 is fouled by B5 and is erroneously awarded bonus free throws. A1 makes both free throws. Team B then takes the ball inbounds, and on its offensive end, A4 commits Team A's seventh team foul by fouling B2. The officials realize they have erroneously awarded free throws to A1 (a) before the ball is at the disposal of B2 for the front end of the bonus, or (b) after the ball is at the disposal of B2 for the front end of the bonus.

Ruling: In (a), the error is still correctable as it was discovered before the first live ball after time had come off the clock. The foul on A4 and the free throws by A1 should be nullified, and the ball should be put in play at the spot nearest B5's foul. In (b), the ball having been put at the disposal of B2 constitutes the second live ball after time had come off the clock. The error of granting A1 free throws cannot be corrected. A1's free throws count, and play continues with B2 attempting the first free throw.

Uhhhhg... not a big fan of it, but if that's what they want.

2-10-5: Points scored, consumed time, and additional activity, which may occur prior to the recognition of an error, shall not be nullified.

First, Correct The Error ...
 

2-10-4: If the error is a free throw by the wrong player or at the wrong basket, or the awarding of an unmerited free throw, the free throw and the activity during it, other than unsporting, flagrant, intentional or technical fouls, shall be canceled.

Cancel the unmerited free throws by A1. A4's foul still counts. B2 gets to shoot the free throws. Line players up to rebound B2's free throw.

If A4's common foul had been a rebounding foul during A1's unmerited free throw, that foul would have been canceled.

What case is NevadaRef's play from?

Agree completely. Although the timing is difficult to pinpoint: in order to be "during the free throw", the foul would have to occur between the time the ball hits the rim or backboard and the time when it is clear that the free throw will be unsuccessful.

I was wondering the same thing. Maybe a Referee Magazine interp?

It is from the 2008-09 NFHS Basketball Preseason Guide. :eek:

This document is an "official publication of the NFHS" and is "published by referee enterprises, inc. in cooperation with the NFHS." The quoted words appear on the front cover of the pamphlet.

The play appears in an article on page 11 entitled "Is it Live or Dead? Does it Matter?" No author is credited, so that person is spared the embarrassment. :o

I think that it is pretty sad that an incorrect ruling can be given in such a document. Don't they have anyone check this stuff before distributing it across the country? :(

Unfortunately, I believe that this drop in quality is a direct consequence of the NFHS partnering with and turning over publication of a good deal of its material to the same people who produce Referee Magazine, which is also known to contain numerous mistakes of this kind. :(

Fixed it for ya. ;)
4-20-2

The rules committee itself (or what appears to be the rules committee) has certainly made some "interesting" rulings in the last couple of years. Perhaps it has as much to do with the current makeup of the committee? But where is Ms. Struckhoff in all this? I would expect her to be the balance to the force among all those coach and administrator types. :(

That would be an interesting comment if there was more than one coach/administrator on the rules committee. The NFHS committee, unlike the NCAA committee, is staffed mostly by officials.

It's Called Proofreading, It's Not A New Concept ...
 

Welcome to my world. It's called "IAABO Land".

Ooooo, so sorry. Nice try.

Can't have a rebounding foul until the ball hits the backboard or rim. If an offensive player steps into the lane before that, it's an immediate violation and dead ball. You certainly can have a foul before that, but not during rebounding action.

I suggest that you choose your words better in the future. These are your words, not mine or Billy's:

What you wrote for that timeframe was incorrect.

A careful reading would have understood that "in order to be "during the free throw", the [rebounding] foul would have to occur between...", since that was the explicit situation that I was responding to. :p

(I can keep this up for days. :D And it doesn't even count as hijacking!)