Unmerited free throw

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Which is in conflict with 2.10.1 Sit G.

BTW Sit G is correct. The ruling for Sit D needs to be that the error is discovered while the ball is still dead prior to Team B taking possession and stepping OOB for the throw-in. Once the throw-in count has begun, the POI is now that throw-in.

Whoever rewrote the case plays for 2.10 this year really screwed up. 2.10.1 Sit A is also wrong.

It's almost as if whoever wrote them thinks the correction is "go back to the time of the error and start over" and opposed to "resume from the point the game was interrupted."

[jdw3018]

Man, am I glad I saw this thread. We had a big discussion about this last week at our rules study session, and I just couldn't figure out why this would be correct.

If B has the ball for the throw-in, it's live. If they throw the ball in and time starts and then we discover the error, obviously B is getting the ball back where they had it.

I see absolutely no rules justification to make this case ruling correct...

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

I see absolutely no rules justification to make this case ruling correct...

That's why I started the thread, JDW, and why I couldn't believe nobody jumped in when PaulK posted his answer with the case play citation.

I'm glad you found it, too.

[jritchie]

THERE WERE POINTS SCORED. Since you had an unmerited free throw, you cancel the throw and ANYTHING THAT HAS HAPPENED DURING THE THROW THAT WAS UNMERITED UNLESS IT'S FLAGRANT, UNSPORTING, INTENTIONAL OR TECHNICAL. So I would take that as nothing has happened after the first free throw, is that maybe where they are getting the ruling, go with Alternating possesion?? They went back to the first free throw missing and therefore no team control, so go with arrow. Since the ball had not came in and no one still has no control, I would have to say go with the arrow on this one.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by jritchie

THERE WERE POINTS SCORED. Since you had an unmerited free throw, you cancel the throw and ANYTHING THAT HAS HAPPENED AFTERWARDS UNLESS IT'S FLAGRANT, UNSPORTING, INTENTIONAL OR TECHNICAL. So I would take that as nothing has happened after the first free throw, is that maybe where they are getting the ruling, go with Alternating possesion?? They went back to the first free throw missing and therefore no team control, so go with arrow. Since the ball had not came in and no one still has no control, I would have to say go with the arrow on this one.

You don't cancel everything that happened after the error. You cancel what happens during the unmerited free throw (rebounding foul is about the only thing that would happen). B1 grabbing the ball for the throw in, making it live, which is after the error and therefore shouldn't be canceled.

The rules would have to make a distinction for POI between a throw in and after that same throw in. The rules make no such distinction, the error was recognized while B1 had the ball for a throw in, therefore the POI should be B's throw in.

[jritchie]

Sorry, didn't mean everything afterwards, just during unmerited throw, edited above! I guess I would have to agree that after the ball is live, since Team B has picked the ball up and was ready to throw it in, but I just don't think that it should be Team B's throw in unless that ball came in. Now after it came in, I would totally agree, but since it hasn't, I'm still wanting to go with the arrow in this one!

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by jritchie

Now after it came in, I would totally agree, but since it hasn't, I'm still wanting to go with the arrow in this one!

You may feel that is more fair, but it simply doesn't jive with the rules.

And, as many have pointed out here - the correctable error rules were not written to be fair.

[jritchie]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

If B has the ball for the throw-in, it's live. If they throw the ball in and time starts and then we discover the error, obviously B is getting the ball back where they had it.

I see absolutely no rules justification to make this case ruling correct...

I just think that this is another rule justification where we need TEAM CONTROL FOR THROW IN'S, due to no team having control even though the ball is live for the throw in, I'm pretty sure this is why they are going back and going Alt. Poss.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by jritchie

I just think that this is another rule justification where we need TEAM CONTROL FOR THROW IN'S, due to no team having control even though the ball is live for the throw in, I'm pretty sure this is why they are going back and going Alt. Poss.

Sorry, but you are incorrect with your reasoning. POI explicitly applies to throw ins. If you have an accidental whistle during a throw in, do you go to the AP because there is no team control? No.

4-36-2...Play shall be resumed by one of the following methods:

b. A free throw or throw-in when the interruption occurred during this activity or if a team is entitled to such.

The error was discovered (this is the interruption) during a throw-in. Therefore, correct the error (cancel the score of the unmerited FT) and then go to the POI (B's throw-in).

[jritchie]

I guess I would have to agree that the correctable error penalties need to be re-written to go along with POI interps...

[OHBBREF]

Originally Posted by jritchie

I guess I would have to agree that the correctable error penalties need to be re-written to go along with POI interps...

these are not penalties, it is a correction of an error that occured due to in some cases the officials lack of attention to detail (i.e. awarding FT not merrited, not awarding merrited FT's, wrong shooter, wrong basket, you can put those all in the I was sleeping catagory for the most part).

So all you are doing is fixing the mistake made and returning to play where you stopped. the most dificult thing I come up with in this process is determining if we are within the period of time where the mistake is correctable.

putting the ball back in play where we stopped in most cases is the simplest way to do it.
NCAA -Art 5 describes it fairly clearly.
Art 5 when an error is corrected play shall be resumed from the point of interuption to correct the error, unless the correction involves the failure to award merritted free throw (s) and there has been no change of possession since the error was made. In that case, play shall resume as after any normal free throw.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

It's almost as if whoever wrote them thinks the correction is "go back to the time of the error and start over" and opposed to "resume from the point the game was interrupted."

I agree. Or she knows to use the POI, but she thinks that the POI is really the POE (Point of Error).