Free throw violation

[rpadgett46231]

A1 is the free throw shooter- B1 is the defense occupying a lane space. B1 steps into the lane early- A1 shoots- completely misses the rim-
My question- is does A1 get to shoot again- this is the 2nd shot of 2.

Thanks

[jritchie]

Originally Posted by rpadgett46231

A1 is the free throw shooter- B1 is the defense occupying a lane space. B1 steps into the lane early- A1 shoots- completely misses the rim-
My question- is does A1 get to shoot again- this is the 2nd shot of 2.

Thanks

Double violation, unless you say that because of B1 stepping in, A1 was disconcerted and was caused to shoot the airball, then they would get the 2nd shot over! And they would have a good argument for it too!

[rpadgett46231]

So your saying since its a double violation- you go to the Alternating Possession??

[tjones1]

If all B1 did was step into the lane early, I've got a double violation. Go AP.

[jritchie]

yes, if you don't say the shooter was disconcerted and allow them to shoot again, Arrow!

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by rpadgett46231

So your saying since its a double violation- you go to the Alternating Possession??

Exactly.

[CoachP]

This is where you would have to judge if A1 was disconcerted. It's (the OP)worded that you have B1 stepping into the lane THEN A1 shooting. Could be/may not be disconcertion...you decide.

But, normally, the ball is in the air when the B1's of the world violate, trying to time the "hit on the rim/backboard". That's double violation and AP

[Coach Bill]

So, you'd call a violation on B-1, if he stepped in right when the ball was going to touch the rim, but happened to fall a hair short?

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

So, you'd call a violation on B-1, if he stepped in right when the ball was going to touch the rim, but happened to fall a hair short?

If B-1 stepped in after the ball had clearly missed, then it's not a violation because the FT was over.

So, in your scenario, no violation.

[CoachP]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

So, you'd call a violation on B-1, if he stepped in right when the ball was going to touch the rim, but happened to fall a hair short?

Bill, you and I should both know an official can't possibly see both of those happen at the same time!!

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

If B-1 stepped in after the ball had clearly missed, then it's not a violation because the FT was over.

So, in your scenario, no violation.

It isn't exact... but this is a case play.

I believe the play in the case book the shooter steps on the line and then B commits a violation.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by tjones1

It isn't exact... but this is a case play.

I believe the play in the case book the shooter steps on the line and then B commits a violation.

9.1.3 Sit H

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

9.1.3 Sit H

Thanks, Nevada! I was away from my books when I posted.

[refnrev]

Originally Posted by CoachP

Bill, you and I should both know an official can't possibly see both of those happen at the same time!!

_______________

No because two different officials are watching for each of those things.

[CoachP]

Originally Posted by refnrev

_______________

No because two different officials are watching for each of those things.

Then who decides which happens first?