The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 09, 2008, 11:26am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 655
FT lane provisions

NFHS.

A1 shooting last FT. A2 and A3 are properly lined up on the lane with B1,2,3 and 4 also lined up.
A1's shot is released and A2 and/or A3 takes a small step backwards (within the 36" limit). Upon the visual of the step back, B2 steps into the lane before the FT has hit iron.

In youseguyses opinion, has A2 caused B1's violation even though A2 stayed in her "space"?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 09, 2008, 11:28am
Lighten up, Francis.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachP View Post
In youseguyses opinion, has A2 caused B1's violation even though A2 stayed in her "space"?
Not unless you think A2 did it on purpose (maybe flinching) to get B1 to violate.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 09, 2008, 11:30am
Ch1town
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachP View Post
In youseguyses opinion, has A2 caused B1's violation even though A2 stayed in her "space"?
It seems as though you answered your own question coach.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 09, 2008, 11:45am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ch1town View Post
It seems as though you answered your own question coach.
That's what I was hoping!
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 09, 2008, 12:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 1,847
It is ridiculous to infer that a player stepping backward within their allowed space would cause another player to step forward into the key and violate.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 09, 2008, 01:01pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smitty View Post
It is ridiculous to infer that a player stepping backward within their allowed space would cause another player to step forward into the key and violate.
I coach girls and root for the Detroit Lions....nothing surprises me.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 09, 2008, 01:21pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,191
Did this get called on your girls?
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 09, 2008, 01:30pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
Did this get called on your girls?
No, we are undertall this year and we're working on ways to get a better shot at offensive rebounds because of all the new "room" down low. Step back and swing behind and around B1 and B2 once in a while.

Just wanna make sure an A2 quick step back isn't justification for B1 jumping the gun.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 09, 2008, 01:46pm
M.A.S.H.
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachP View Post
I coach girls and root for the Detroit Lions....nothing surprises me.
Seek help ASAP!!!
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 09, 2008, 01:51pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 1,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachP View Post
No, we are undertall this year and we're working on ways to get a better shot at offensive rebounds because of all the new "room" down low. Step back and swing behind and around B1 and B2 once in a while.

Just wanna make sure an A2 quick step back isn't justification for B1 jumping the gun.
You never know what someone will consider to be disconcertion, but I can see if the girl fakes going forward and then goes backward, and the fake forward cause the opponent to step in - that might be something you could consider disconcertion. But to simply step back - I just can't visualize how anyone could consider that a cause for the opponent stepping in.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 09, 2008, 01:56pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Houghton, U.P., Michigan
Posts: 9,953
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachP View Post
No, we are undertall this year and we're working on ways to get a better shot at offensive rebounds because of all the new "room" down low. Step back and swing behind and around B1 and B2 once in a while.

Just wanna make sure an A2 quick step back isn't justification for B1 jumping the gun.
...Or start a 1/2 step behind the low blocker and make them guess which way yer goin'? They may be watching you and not the ball or rim.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 09, 2008, 08:23pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,782
There is nothing deceptive about stepping backwards. The player has not violated by leaving her marked lane space, nor has she faked to cause her opponent to violate.

Perfectly legal play.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 10, 2008, 12:45am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: In a little pink house
Posts: 5,289
Send a message via AIM to Back In The Saddle Send a message via MSN to Back In The Saddle Send a message via Yahoo to Back In The Saddle
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smitty View Post
You never know what someone will consider to be disconcertion, but I can see if the girl fakes going forward and then goes backward, and the fake forward cause the opponent to step in - that might be something you could consider disconcertion. But to simply step back - I just can't visualize how anyone could consider that a cause for the opponent stepping in.
Not to pick nits or anything, well, okay, entirely to pick nits...

Disconcertion is only one issue. Faking is another issue altogether. Only the defense can disconcert and only the free thrower can be disconcerted. The free thrower and any player along the lane can fake.

NFHS 9-1-3
b. The free thrower shall not fake a try, nor shall any player in a marked lane space fake to cause an opponent to violate.
c. No opponent shall disconcert the free thrower.

I don't see any issue with CoachP's strategy as far as the player violating by leaving her lane space, by faking, or by disconcerting.
__________________
"It is not enough to do your best; you must know what to do, and then do your best." - W. Edwards Deming
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rule 9 Section 2-Throw In Provisions RefLarry Basketball 15 Mon Mar 31, 2008 06:02pm
there are no provisions in the rules for "do-overs" Nevadaref Basketball 4 Thu Nov 22, 2007 07:30pm
FT lane ruling Ref in PA Basketball 0 Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:45am
Rule Qestion: Throw-in Provisions Skarecrow Basketball 6 Mon Jan 30, 2006 09:04am
Lane Violation? Grail Basketball 2 Sat Nov 20, 2004 08:34pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:44am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1