NCAA ruling (shot clock expires)

[Mendy Trent]

Test question from the NCAA test:

While A-1’s try is in flight, A-2 and B-2 commit a double personal foul, followed by the shot clock expiring. The ball fails to hit the ring or flange. The possession arrow favors team A. The official:

A. used the alternating possession procedure to resume play
B. ruled this is not a shot clock violation
C. ruled shot clock violation and awarded the ball to team B

I would have said A because there is no team control during a shot attempt. However, the correct answer is listed as C.

Can someone give me the rational for that?

Thanks!

Mendy

[OHBBREF]

It is easier to deal with???

[Adam]

The idea of POI is to go back to what would have happened without the double foul (or IW). In this case, the shot clock violation is what would have happened.

[Mendy Trent]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

The idea of POI is to go back to what would have happened without the double foul (or IW). In this case, the shot clock violation is what would have happened.

Huh? Doesn't point of interruption mean where you were interrupted? The fouls happened when there was no team control.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Mendy Trent

Huh? Doesn't point of interruption mean where you were interrupted? The fouls happened when there was no team control.

But the fouls don't cause a dead ball with a try in flght. So the ball remains live until there is a shot clock violation (which causes the dead ball). At that point, you have a dead ball with a double foul that needs to be dealts with (POI) and a violation (B's ball OOB)....therefore, the POI is the enforcement of the violation.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

But the fouls don't cause a dead ball with a try in flght. So the ball remains live until there is a shot clock violation

But the whistle for the fouls DOES cause the clock to stop. So the shot clock should not sound. There should be no violation.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

But the whistle for the fouls DOES cause the clock to stop. So the shot clock should not sound. There should be no violation.

Correct you are...and time, if any was observed to be on the shot clock at the time of the whistle, should be restored. If it said "0" but the buzzer had not yet sounded, no correction can be made, the clock has expired and it is a violation.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

But the whistle for the fouls DOES cause the clock to stop. So the shot clock should not sound. There should be no violation.

And that is what makes this play difficult. We don't know if there was a timing error or not as we aren't told when the official sounded the whistle for the double personal foul. We only know that the DPF happened prior to the shot clock horn sounding.

Now near the expiration of time at the end of a half the monitor can be consulted, if there is one, and the time at the point of the contact for the double foul would be restored. That may well eliminate a shot clock violation. I'm not thrilled with the rules generating two different answers for the same play depending upon the point in the contest when it occurs.