Ruling

[Jurassic Referee]

Case book play 9.1.3SitC is the exact play.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Case book play 9.1.3SitC is the exact play.

Thank you. But why would this be under "Faking?"

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Thank you. But why would this be under "Faking?"

Damned if I know.

Probably should have it's own section called "DELAYED DELAYED VIOLATION".

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Case book play 9.1.3SitC is the exact play.

thank you. It's amazing what you can find when you rtfm. Heck, you might even find out that something else you knew for sure just isn't true.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Case book play 9.1.3SitC is the exact play.

Thanks JR........

[mbyron]

The ruling makes sense to me. The violation "counts" depending on whether the FT is made. If we have to wait till after a time-out to know that, so be it. Enforce the penalty if the player misses.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Case book play 9.1.3SitC is the exact play.

9.1.3 SITUATION C: A1 is preparing to attempt a free throw. Prior to A1’s
release of the ball, B1 fakes causing A2 to enter the lane prematurely. A1 then requests and is granted a time-out. RULING: Upon resuming play, A1 is entitled to a free throw and the official shall use the proper signal indicating a violation by B1 prior to the granting of the time-out. If the free throw is successful, the violation is ignored, if unsuccessful a substitute throw is awarded. (9-1-3b)

[Mregor]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

9.1.3 SITUATION C: A1 is preparing to attempt a free throw. Prior to A1’s
release of the ball, B1 fakes causing A2 to enter the lane prematurely. A1 then requests and is granted a time-out. RULING: Upon resuming play, A1 is entitled to a free throw and the official shall use the proper signal indicating a violation by B1 prior to the granting of the time-out. If the free throw is successful, the violation is ignored, if unsuccessful a substitute throw is awarded. (9-1-3b)

Well I've learned my something new for the day. Never would have thought that.

[muxbule]

Originally Posted by Mregor

Well I've learned my something new for the day. Never would have thought that.

That's what makes reading this forum so freaking valuable. Along with laughing at some responses what you learn is invaluable.

[Back In The Saddle]

IMHO it makes complete sense. The defensive team has violated. The penalty for the violation is a replacement free throw if the original free throw is missed. Why would a time out change that?

Can you name me any other violation that can be canceled by calling a time out?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

IMHO it makes complete sense. The defensive team has violated. The penalty for the violation is a replacement free throw if the original free throw is missed. Why would a time out change that?

Can you name me any other violation that can be canceled by calling a time out?

I do not agree about it making sense. For one there are a lot of times the team in possession can call a timeout that might prevent a possible violation or infraction by the team without the ball. And a FT violation is one of the few situations where there is a delay. I think it is kind of silly to apply a violation after the ball has been made dead as a result of a timeout, then come back and apply the non-called violation. That is just my opinion.

Peace

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

there are a lot of times the team in possession can call a timeout that might prevent a possible violation or infraction

True, but are there any times when a team can call a time-out to negate a violation that has already occurred?

I can't think of one off the top of my head.