foul-travel-shot question
 

a1 drives to the basket and picks up his dribble in going for a layup. B1 fouls a1 by grabbing his arm. a1 shoots and scores but because b1 is holding him, he is unable to release the shot until after his pivot foot has lifted and then been placed on the ground again. What is the correct call and procedure? team a is not in penalty.





I would call holding foul, the shot does not count..... Not sure but I would award a1 two shots and call it a shooting foul.

this happened recently in a pick-up game and got me thinking...

If he is fouled in the act of shooting, he gets two shots. Why would he not?
The travel caused the ball to be dead, so the basket cannot count.

The question you need to ask is "When did the try for goal begin?"

It begins on the gather (when A1 picks up his dribble and starts his motion for the layup in your example). If he then scores you count the basket and award 1 FT. The fact the pivot returned to ground should not even be a factor here. The foul occurred first.

Hope this helps.

I disagree here. If that's true then in theory: A1 could be fouled going up for a layup, not release and come back to the ground then shoot and make it and be awarded the basket plus one FT.

The pivot foot returning to the floor before the release ends the try. He was not able to get the shot off so the basket doesn't count. A1 receives two FTs for being fouled in the act of shooting, as HoopGuy originally stated.

Actually, jar has it correct - the travel causes the ball to become dead, and the shot does not count.

You are correct in stating it is a shooting foul due to the gather to start the shooting motion. And, the reason a shot counts after a foul is because usually the ball does not become dead until after the try is either successful or unsuccessful (4-41-4). However, the travel violation causes the ball to become dead immediately (9-4 Penalty). Therefore, 2 shots will be awarded, even though the ball eventually went through the basket.

Look at it this way - as an extreme example, what if, after A1 was fouled while starting the shooting motion, A1 continued walking (literally 5-6 steps) towards the basket and eventually put it in, would you still count the basket?

Defintely 2 FTs, no basket.

Also if he held on that long, you could consider the foul to be intentional.


So he could jump, be fouled, return to the floor, shoot, score and syou would count the basket?

WRONG.

Two FTs.

Follow on question...

How would you communicate the details of this situation? Everybody saw the foul; everybody saw the ball go in the basket. My bet is most people didn't see the travel because they were not watching the feet.

What do you signal at the spot? How would you clarify this for the coaches? How do you respond to the O coach's inevitable, "But the foul caused the travel."?

one word: irrelevant

I know that we have discussed this play before.

I know that we have easily decided that the goal doesn't count due to the travel making the ball dead.

What I can't remember is if there was an NFHS case play or interp on this. :eek:

BillyMac is going to give me h#ll for that! :)

A Memory Like An Elephant ...
 

Nevadaref: You've got a great memory. I posted this play on February 23, 2008. It's similar, but not exactly the same as the situation in this thread:

A1 gets offensive rebound near the basket, goes to shot the ball, and is grabbed on the forearm by B1. I blow my whistle for a foul on B1. A1 doesn't complete the shooting motion, at first due to the foul, but after B1 releases the forearm of A1, A1 brings the ball back down, in kind of a double pump motion, before shooting it again. Before the ball has a chance to go in, I yell, "No shot", because I don't want the basket to count if it goes in, it doesn't, but I do award two shots for A1 being fouled in the act of shooting, that is his first shot motion, not his second shot motion. How far does continuation continue? Was this the correct call?

Here's my followup post:

I know it's tough to describe a play like this in words. Heck, I was there, and I have trouble replaying it in my mind.

1) I know that the shooter was not airborne. He was a little on the "husky" side, and didn't do much jumping during the game. However, I am interested in how the call would be different if he was airborne?

2) I didn't use the term "pump fake" because that's not what I saw, especially the kind of "pump fake" that would cause many of us to call a three second violation on the shooter despite the exception to the rule. This can best be described as a "double pump". In other words, it looked like, if I had not blown the whistle for the foul, he was going to try to shot "again" after having it blocked the first time.

http://forum.officiating.com/basketb...-finished.html

Actually, this is the most recent thread on this play that I recall: http://forum.officiating.com/basketb...es-travel.html

Although, I'm sure that there were prior ones as well.

I've found the earlier thread on this from January of 2007.

http://forum.officiating.com/basketb...tml#post371163


The element of a travel is first mentioned in post #9 by JugglingReferee.

http://forum.officiating.com/371163-post9.html

Hey, maybe we could have an entire thread dedicated to posting links to old threads! Kind of a "greatest hits of the basketball forum" thread. :D