The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Occupying Free throw Spaces (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/50343-occupying-free-throw-spaces.html)

NURef Sun Dec 14, 2008 09:35pm

Occupying Free throw Spaces
 
I'm sure this has been covered but I was just corrected in a game tonight by my partner so I want to confirm the call...learn.

I was administrating the free throw (one shot/&1). A is shooting and A's players decide not to occupy the second lane spaces...all four of B's players were in their respective lane spaces. I informed the two B players (close to shooter) that they could take the second lane spaces vacated by A. My partner (in T) jumped in and immediately told the B players that they had to remain in their spaces...further stating to me that "that's incorrect and whoever told you that was WRONG"...in front of all the players and anyone else within earshot.

Since my partner had over 15 yrs experience doing college and HS I did not challenge the correction (I've only got 3 yrs experience). I did say later that I thought the players from B could occupy any of the 3 lane spaces. My partner just said no. I tried to find it in the rules book but could only find a reference to it in the HS casebook 8.1.4. This was a HS JV game.

Wrong or Right?

NewNCref Sun Dec 14, 2008 09:46pm

Team B MUST occupy the first lane space above the block. Team A MAY occupy the second lane spaces. Team B MAY occupy the third and final marked lane spaces.

I only have my 07-08 rule book on hand, but it should be the same rule citation. Rule 8-1-4(e) says players may move along and across the lane to occupy a vacant space within the above limitation. Team B may have up to four (and at least two) players lined up on the lane. Team A may have up to two (or none, if they so choose).

Now, if A1 already had the ball at his disposal, the Team B players could not move, as doing so would constitute a violation.

NURef Sun Dec 14, 2008 09:56pm

Thanks

I only had my 07/08 rule book with me at the game. I pulled my case book when I got home and it states (last sentence of 8.1.4 situation), "Four defensive players are permitted in any of the first three vacant marked lane spaces". The rules don't really make it clear other than using the words "shall" and "May".

Thanks for the reply.

Nevadaref Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:18am

Quote:

Originally Posted by NURef (Post 558154)
I'm sure this has been covered but I was just corrected in a game tonight by my partner so I want to confirm the call...learn.

I was administrating the free throw (one shot/&1). A is shooting and A's players decide not to occupy the second lane spaces...all four of B's players were in their respective lane spaces. I informed the two B players (close to shooter) that they could take the second lane spaces vacated by A. My partner (in T) jumped in and immediately told the B players that they had to remain in their spaces...further stating to me that "that's incorrect and whoever told you that was WRONG"...in front of all the players and anyone else within earshot.

Since my partner had over 15 yrs experience doing college and HS I did not challenge the correction (I've only got 3 yrs experience). I did say later that I thought the players from B could occupy any of the 3 lane spaces. My partner just said no. I tried to find it in the rules book but could only find a reference to it in the HS casebook 8.1.4. This was a HS JV game.

Wrong or Right?

This is why you shouldn't blindly trust the veterans.

Your partner was WRONG!

In an NFHS or NCAAM game the players may move and fill vacant lane spaces, except for the bottom two which MUST be occupied by the nonshooting team when players are allowed along the lane.

In an NCAAW game the spaces are designated and only the one team is allowed to fill those spots. No movement is permitted.

Direct your partner to read 8-1-4 (f).

zm1283 Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:24am

This was on the Part II this year as well.

NURef Mon Dec 15, 2008 08:10am

Thanks for the feedback. I will be cautious on how I discuss this with my vet partner for he is a good official.

mick Mon Dec 15, 2008 08:40am

Quote:

Originally Posted by NURef (Post 558154)
I informed the two B players (close to shooter) that they could take the second lane spaces vacated by A.

Why are you coaching team B to an unintended advantage?
In the future, try to avoid that.
It's one thing if they ask, but another if it's volunteered information. ;)

Nevadaref Mon Dec 15, 2008 09:02am

Quote:

Originally Posted by NURef (Post 558154)
My partner (in T) jumped in and immediately told the B players that they had to remain in their spaces...further stating to me that "that's incorrect and whoever told you that was WRONG"...in front of all the players and anyone else within earshot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NURef (Post 558246)
Thanks for the feedback. I will be cautious on how I discuss this with my vet partner for he is a good official.

You're nicer than I am. If a partner treated me that way, and I later found out that he was the one who was wrong, I would throw it in his face. :eek:

newera21 Mon Dec 15, 2008 09:10am

Quote:

Originally Posted by NURef (Post 558246)
Thanks for the feedback. I will be cautious on how I discuss this with my vet partner for he is a good official.

You might think so, but if he doesn't know a basic rule like that, it's debatable. And you deserve credit for seeking out the right answer rather than taking the 15 year vet's info and running with it.

Raymond Mon Dec 15, 2008 09:27am

Quote:

Originally Posted by mick (Post 558255)
Why are you coaching team B to an unintended advantage?
In the future, try to avoid that.
It's one thing if they ask, but another if it's volunteered information. ;)

Concurred whole-heartedly. If they didn't ask there was no need to tell them they could move down.

mbyron Mon Dec 15, 2008 09:43am

Two violations here by your "veteran" partner: (1) having the rule wrong, (2) being an azz about it.

Reminds me of Jim Evans's comment about "veterans": does he have 15 years' experience, or 1 year's experience 15 times?

Scrapper1 Mon Dec 15, 2008 09:43am

Quote:

Originally Posted by NURef (Post 558154)
my partner had over 15 yrs experience doing college

Nevada beat me to it, but if your partner works college WOMEN'S basketball, then that's probably why he made the error. Doesn't make it any better, but it happens. The worst part of this situation is not the error, but the way it was "announced" to you. That's the part I would address in a post-game conversation.

Amesman Mon Dec 15, 2008 01:36pm

Can someone further clarify one more point on this? If FT shooter's opponents for some reason choose not to fill the first spaces, can FT shooter's teammates take them?

8-1-4 uses "shall" (not) in c. and it's not clear if that means "may never," given the use of "may" in d.

Adam Mon Dec 15, 2008 01:41pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amesman (Post 558380)
Can someone further clarify one more point on this? If FT shooter's opponents for some reason choose not to fill the first spaces, can FT shooter's teammates take them?

8-1-4 uses "shall" (not) in c. and it's not clear if that means "may never," given the use of "may" in d.

The opponents do not have the option here of not occupying the first two spaces. Two opponents must occupy these spaces.

Raymond Mon Dec 15, 2008 02:23pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amesman (Post 558380)
Can someone further clarify one more point on this? If FT shooter's opponents for some reason choose not to fill the first spaces, can FT shooter's teammates take them?

8-1-4 uses "shall" (not) in c. and it's not clear if that means "may never," given the use of "may" in d.


I always convert "shall not" to "is not permitted to" when I read a rule.

refnrev Mon Dec 15, 2008 02:38pm

I am continually amazed at the misunderstandings over the lane. I had a newbie tell me last week that all the spaces had to be filled before the shooter could shoot. I told him that was not right. When he told me which of his partners told him that I was surprised. However, in retrospect, it was the same guy that I corrected one night by telling hiom it was not possible for the thrower to travel on a throw-in.

BillyMac Mon Dec 15, 2008 08:05pm

He Still Has A Chance To Win ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 558384)
The opponents do not have the option here of not occupying the first two spaces. Two opponents must occupy these spaces.

Unless there's only one player left on that team.

tjones1 Tue Dec 16, 2008 01:15am

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 558509)
Unless there's only one player left on that team.

True. :D

Nevadaref Tue Dec 16, 2008 01:17am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amesman (Post 558380)
Can someone further clarify one more point on this? If FT shooter's opponents for some reason choose not to fill the first spaces, can FT shooter's teammates take them?

8-1-4 uses "shall" (not) in c. and it's not clear if that means "may never," given the use of "may" in d.

Read 8-1-4c again. The final sentence makes this very clear.

"No teammate of the free thrower shall occupy either of these marked lane spaces."

Ref Ump Welsch Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:26am

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 558398)
I always convert "shall not" to "is not permitted to" when I read a rule.

You're not by any chance a member of a law-making or rule-making governmental body? ;)

Amesman Tue Dec 16, 2008 03:08pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 558577)
Read 8-1-4c again. The final sentence makes this very clear.

"No teammate of the free thrower shall occupy either of these marked lane spaces."

Sheesh. Better start wearing my glasses when I read or work. tx

rwest Tue Dec 16, 2008 03:14pm

Would this be a violation?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 558509)
Unless there's only one player left on that team.

If they only have one player and therefore, can't occupy both spaces as required by rule, then do we have a delayed violation? Or do we ignore that since they don't have enough players to fulfill the requirements?

bob jenkins Tue Dec 16, 2008 03:16pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by rwest (Post 558748)
If they only have one player and therefore, can't occupy both spaces as required by rule, then do we have a delayed violation? Or do we ignore that since they don't have enough players to fulfill the requirements?

The latter.

just another ref Tue Dec 16, 2008 03:17pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by rwest (Post 558748)
If they only have one player and therefore, can't occupy both spaces as required by rule, then do we have a delayed violation? Or do we ignore that since they don't have enough players to fulfill the requirements?


No violation. If nothing else, slap a 2-3 on it. A team shall not be required to do the impossible.

Nevadaref Tue Dec 16, 2008 08:04pm

Or check the NFHS interps for this situation! ;)

2003-04 NFHS BASKETBALL RULES INTERPRETATIONS

SITUATION 2: Team A started the game with seven team members in the scorebook. All team members foul out but one, A1. Team A is leading by eight points with 38 seconds left in the game with a chance to win. A1 fouls B2 with Team B in the bonus. A1 occupies one of the first marked lane spaces for the free throw, with no teammate to occupy the other required space. RULING: By rule, a team may continue to play with one player if that team has an opportunity to win the game. Accordingly, since Team A can only put one player in the required free-throw marked lane space, it cannot be penalized. Further, Team B may not occupy the first marked lane space left vacant by Team A. (3-1-1 Note, 8-1-3)

BillyMac Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:13pm

Amazin' ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 558815)
Or check the NFHS interps for this situation! 2003-04 NFHS BASKETBALL RULES INTERPRETATIONS

How do your remember, or get your hands quickly on, an interpretation from five years ago? I have trouble figuring out where I left my keys, from a few hours ago!

Nevadaref Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:22pm

I know the author of that interp. ;)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:13am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1