Act of shooting

[BillyMac]

Continuous Motion: If an opponent fouls after a player has started a try for goal, he/she is permitted to complete the customary arm movement, and if pivoting or stepping when fouled, may complete the usual foot or body movement in any activity while holding the ball. These privileges are granted only when the usual throwing motion has started before the foul occurs and before the ball is in flight.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Continuous Motion: If an opponent fouls after a player has started a try for goal, he/she is permitted to complete the customary arm movement, and if pivoting or stepping when fouled, may complete the usual foot or body movement in any activity while holding the ball. These privileges are granted only when the usual throwing motion has started before the foul occurs and before the ball is in flight.

Also: 4-41-3: The try starts when the player begins the motion which habitually precedes the release of the ball.

Gathering, by my description, is not part of a throwing motion, nor is it part of a motion which habitually precedes the release. Yes, the gathering precedes (comes before) the release, but so did the dribble.

Just because a player has "gathered" the ball, (ended the dribble) is he always entitled to two shots if he heaves up a try after getting fouled?
I say no.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Also: 4-41-3: The try starts when the player begins the motion which habitually precedes the release of the ball.

Gathering, by my description, is not part of a throwing motion, nor is it part of a motion which habitually precedes the release. Yes, the gathering precedes (comes before) the release, but so did the dribble.

Just because a player has "gathered" the ball, (ended the dribble) is he always entitled to two shots if he heaves up a try after getting fouled?
I say no.

I agree.

[daggo66]

As a football referee and a basketball coach, I'd like to give a perspective on this. As a coach I'd like to see the action continue and allow the eventual shot and potential basket before calling tha foul. I liken this to a pass interference call. The defense may interfere with the receiver, but we often hold the flag to see if the catch was made. If the catch was made it could be argues that the defender didn;t interfere with the catch since the catch was made. It can be frustrating as a coach to have the described play blown dead as the ball enters the basket and all we have is a throw in, especially if a shot clock is involved. The defense could actually benefit from the foul in this case.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by daggo66

As a football referee and a basketball coach, I'd like to give a perspective on this. As a coach I'd like to see the action continue and allow the eventual shot and potential basket before calling tha foul. I liken this to a pass interference call. The defense may interfere with the receiver, but we often hold the flag to see if the catch was made. If the catch was made it could be argues that the defender didn;t interfere with the catch since the catch was made. It can be frustrating as a coach to have the described play blown dead as the ball enters the basket and all we have is a throw in, especially if a shot clock is involved. The defense could actually benefit from the foul in this case.

Continue until when?

In the OP, the player "took two steps" -- so that's traveling, and the ball would be dead then, so no shot can happen.

If there's a shot clock, it's reset on the defensive foul.

In the football example, the penalty for DPI is always less than (or equal to ) the gain by the catch, so the offense will just take the catch. I think you should still throw the flag though, becuase (a) there is (often) a lag between the interference and the catch, so you don't know if the catch will be made, (b) there might be something after the catch that affects the penalty and (c) there might be another penalty that affects the play (all the above said with the knowledge that I am not a football official).

I agree that there can (and often needs to be) a "patient whistle" on plays similar to the OP. If the offenseive player can play through the contact and continue to the basket, perhaps there's no foul. But, in the OP, the ball was "gathered" at the FT line -- if the foul prevented the "continuous motion shot" then it needs to be called.

[BOFARMA]

A1 dribbles the length of the court & immediately upon gathering the ball at the FT line, B1 fouls A1 (tweet). A1 takes 2 steps [/COLOR][/B]& misses the shot.

I say A1 shoots 2 FTs my more veteran partners say “he wasn’t in the act” when the foul occurred.
Thoughts??
A1 takes 2 steps ???

See post #19

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BOFARMA

A1 takes 2 steps ???

As we all know, 2 steps has nothing to do with whether a player traveled. It's all on where the feet were when the ball was gathered.

In the OP, the point of stating "2 steps" was to put the shot into time perspective with regard to the foul.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Also: 4-41-3: The try starts when the player begins the motion which habitually precedes the release of the ball.

Gathering, by my description, is not part of a throwing motion, nor is it part of a motion which habitually precedes the release. Yes, the gathering precedes (comes before) the release, but so did the dribble.

Just because a player has "gathered" the ball, (ended the dribble) is he always entitled to two shots if he heaves up a try after getting fouled?
I say no.

You had better say yes.

Read the rules that Billy Mac quoted. The player is allowed to complete any and all legal foot movements prior to the release of the ball for a field goal attempt. The coninuous motion rule is telling us that the ending of the dribble can be the start of the field goal attempt.

MTD, Sr.

Most coast to coast plays I've seen end near the rim.

Originally Posted by just another ref

Just because a player has "gathered" the ball, (ended the dribble) is he always entitled to two shots if he heaves up a try after getting fouled?
I say no.

Concur (to a point) but let be perfectly clear as you're making too much out of this sitch.

A1 gathers the ball outside the 28 ft line after walking the ball into the f/c & heaves it up after a whistle for hand checking is NOT gonna get you to the line if I'm the calling official.

In a coast to coast play (as previously described) North/South to the rim play, I believe the player has gathered to alight. Not to avoid being trapped or because of losing the ball. His feet never stopped, there was progression to the bucket, he gathered & then came contact... it was all in stride.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

In the OP, the player "took two steps" -- so that's traveling

No sir, forgive me for my poor verbage but please believe me when I say A1 did not exceed the prescribed limits.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I agree that there can (and often needs to be) a "patient whistle" on plays similar to the OP.

I think the timing of the whistle was a big factor in the officials decision for the throw in. There was contact & there was a whistle almost immediately.
Had there been patience, it would have been no doubt he was going up.
I think some verbal communication like, (tweet) "no shot" or (tweet) "going up" instead of (tweet) holding up a fist and allowing the play to finish, then saying "endline" would've helped as well.

Personally, I try to allow them get to the rim after (the *slap* on the arm type of contact occurs--- you know, sounds worse than what it was) then come back & get it if they miss.
Lets me know I did a good job on that play when all the defensive players/fans/coaches (who thought they got away with one) get upset that it was such a LATE call

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

Personally, I try to allow them get to the rim after (the *slap* on the arm type of contact occurs--- you know, sounds worse than what it was) then come back & get it if they miss.
Lets me know I did a good job on that play when all the defensive players/fans/coaches (who thought they got away with one) get upset that it was such a LATE call

Personally, I never get a foul just because the shot missed. If I think it affected it, I'll come back and get it while the shot's in the air. If I think the player had a good shot after the contact, I'll let it go regardless and simply explain to his coach, "The contact didn't affect the play, coach."

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Personally, I never get a foul just because the shot missed. If I think it affected it, I'll come back and get it while the shot's in the air. If I think the player had a good shot after the contact, I'll let it go regardless and simply explain to his coach, "The contact didn't affect the play, coach."

Same here, I come back & get it if I judge that the result of the contact affects the shot attempt.

That being said, how can you determine if the contact affected the play unless you let the play finish?

Are you saying that you've already made your mind up while the play is still in the developement stage of SDF?

In my opinion you can't judge the result of the marginal contact until the play has finished ie; the try has ended. On a shot, I dont believe the play has ended because team control has ended.

For the record, I'm speaking of marginal contact *slap* on the forearm on the way to the bucket that you decide wasn't marginal afterall because it affected the shot. Had the shot gone, then you don't upgrade it to a cheap And 1, it's still marginal.

Obvious fouls, are another story. I believe we should get those when they happen... nothing to decide about there.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

That being said, how can you determine if the contact affected the play unless you let the play finish?

I can't tell you what's right, only how I do it.

In my opinion, we get paid to determine whether the contact affects the shot. To me, that does not get determined by whether the shot goes in, but by whether the shot is made significantly more difficult. IMO, this can be determined by the time the shot is in the air. If the shot is made signficantly more difficult but still goes in, the shooter deserves his free throw.

If the shot is not made more difficult but still misses, the shooter does not deserve two free throws. YMMV.

If it's borderline, I'll probably lean towards a no-call.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

A1 dribbles the length of the court & immediately upon gathering the ball at the FT line, B1 fouls A1 (tweet). A1 takes 2 steps & misses the shot.

Originally Posted by Ch1town

Most coast to coast plays I've seen end near the rim.




In a coast to coast play (as previously described) North/South to the rim play.....

This was the main reason I said we could not automatically assume from the OP that a shooting foul was involved. In my estimation, a player taking the ball "to the rim" does not pick up his dribble at the ft line.


exception: Lebron James doing the crab (or any other kind) dribble

Originally Posted by just another ref

In my estimation, a player taking the ball "to the rim" does not pick up his dribble at the ft line.

Depends on the players skill at the level you work...

When I'm doing 4th graders @ the Y on Saturday mornings, no I dont expect to see that play.

When I'm working some quality mens ball with Pro-AM players & a teammate is yelling "wolf wolf" to A1 who is rapidly dribbling toward the basket, it's not out of the ordinary for him to just pick up the dribble & alight for the little teardrop floater down the lane.