FT or not?
 

1. How would you rule on this play?
2. What are the responsibilities of the partners?

SITCH:

A1 is dribbling and driving toward the basket from the right wing. As A1 drives, he goes airborne with the ball and appears to be gathering the ball in an effort to shoot. As A1 becomes airborne, he is fouled by B1 and the call comes from the trail official. As the trail official's whistle sounds, A1 appears to change his efforts and now dishes a short pass to a teammate. Neither team is in the bonus. The trail official rules that the foul occurred when A1 was in the act of shooting and awards two free throws. Team B coach disagrees with the call, claiming that A1 passed the ball and therefore was not in the act of shooting. The calling official explains briefly that his/her interpretation was A1 was in the act of shooting until fouled.

At half, we had a fourth official from our officiating group enter our dressing room and ask why we awarded two free throws on the play. The fourth official also wanted to know why the lead and "c" official didn't overrule or "provide information" for the calling official.

Does the fact the dribble-driving player eventually passed off the ball require the calling official to change his/her interpretation of the play?

What do you think the responsibilities of the partners are on this play?

1) Foul on the shot. There's a case play or interp on this.

2) The partners should stfu until asked for their opinion.

Exactly....it is based on what he was doing at the time of the foul....not what happens after the foul. The foul may have forced the shooter to give up on the shot.

4-41-2 . . .
A try for field goal is an attempt by a player to score two or three points by throwing the ball into a team’s own basket. A player is trying for goal when the player has the ball and in the official’s judgment is throwing or attempting to throw for goal. It is not essential that the ball leave the player’s hand as a foul could prevent release of the ball.

Any Wiggle Room Here ???
 

Good citation. In this play, can the official use his judgment to decide that although the dribbler may have gathered the ball to begin the act of shooting, the dribbler changed his mind because of the size, and proximity, of the defender, not because of the foul, and the foul did not prevent the release of the try/pass, and the dribbler decided it was in his best interest to pass off to the open man?

Below is copied from my post of December 21, 2008:
Also, when a player drives to the hoop, gets fouled during the move down the lane, the ball, because of the foul, pops out. I make an immediate subjective, experienced decision whether it was a pass, or a shot, and state "That's a pass", if I'm 100% sure that the player, seeing a defensive player in the lane, decided to pass, but was unable to complete the pass due to the foul. I'm probably wrong sometimes, but I want to make my decision, and communicate it to my partner, right away, not on the way to the table, to find a coach waiting for me, saying, "But he was in the act of shooting".

I'm not completely sold on my take on this situation. I would really appreciate some citations to either back me up, meaning the calling official can use judgment to decide if the player was in the act of shooting, or not; or some citations to make me go the other way, that is, once the player drives down the lane using the customary movements of the start of a try, that no matter what happens after that, they're getting at least one free throw for being in the act of shooting.

Yes.