Greetings from Alaska. fouled on the shot

[CoachP]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Welcome to the forum.

There is an argument to be made that the basket shouldn't count because the initial try was not successful, and the 2nd try (tap) started after the foul.

What's the argument for the other way?

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by CoachP

What's the argument for the other way?

That the release of the ball and subsequent tap was all part of the same try.

Not saying I agree with it, but that would be the argument for counting the basket.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by CoachP

What's the argument for the other way?

It's a really cool play.

[Raymond]

Wasilla, Ak???

As in the home of former mayor and current Gov. Sarah Palin?

[AKOFL]

Yes THE Wasilla. my thoughts were that his shooting motion had not been completed as he was still airborn. Say he wasn't fouled and the sae play occured. As he ent up for the shot he lost control but was able to tap it in before he came back down.

[Adam]

The shot can be over before the airborne shooter returns to the floor.
Consider this play:

A1 jumps for shot, gets fouled. The ball goes up and comes down to A1 prior to A1 landing. A1 bats the ball back up. Two completely different shots; second one does not count.

[AKOFL]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

The shot can be over before the airborne shooter returns to the floor.
Consider this play:

A1 jumps for shot, gets fouled. The ball goes up and comes down to A1 prior to A1 landing. A1 bats the ball back up. Two completely different shots; second one does not count.

I appreciate that point. I guess we need to decide if it is part of the original shot movement. Any rule thoughts come to mind? I thought u could argue it either way, but usually their is a right and wrong. Notice I said usually.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by AKOFL

I appreciate that point. I guess we need to decide if it is part of the original shot movement. Any rule thoughts come to mind? I thought u could argue it either way, but usually their is a right and wrong. Notice I said usually.

zm nails the rule reference above.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by AKOFL

I appreciate that point. I guess we need to decide if it is part of the original shot movement. Any rule thoughts come to mind? I thought u could argue it either way, but usually their is a right and wrong. Notice I said usually.

I am having a hard time coming up with any scenario where the shooter's deliberate contacting of the ball after releasing it for a try isn't part of a new play: a rebound, putback or another shot attempt.

[OHBBREF]

Originally Posted by AKOFL

As he ent up for the shot he lost control but was able to tap it in before he came back down.

what if he got fouled after losing control but before the tap is this a try since he lost control???

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by OHBBREF

what if he got fouled after losing control but before the tap is this a try since he lost control???

The player could be considered an airborne shooter if the official deems that he was originally trying for goal prior to losing control of the ball. That would mean that the foul entitles him to two FTs.

However, the tap had not yet begun at the time of the foul, so it cannot be considered in the play and any goal scored because of it would not count.

4-41-7 . . .

The tap starts when the player’s hand(s) touches the ball.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Wasilla, Ak???

As in the home of former mayor and current Gov. Sarah Palin?

Did this game involve the Mavericks?

[AKOFL]

which mavericks?

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by AKOFL

which mavericks?

You betcha.

[AKOFL]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

You betcha.

Still unclear which team that is. better yet who is this