Act of shooting
 

Mens wreck last night:

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.

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

Why is it soooooo difficult for us as officials to understand that once the ball is gathered on a drive to the bucket, that’s when the act of shooting begins… unless he passes the ball. That's one of the reasons we should have a patient whistle on North/South plays. So many of us say “that’s NBA”.
Isn’t the rule the same in all 3 codes???

my pet peeve
 

IMHO, continuous motion is one of the most frequently miscalled plays in all officialdom, present company excluded....
I believe our dear friend Jurassic had a noteworthy observation: Instead of trying to discern when the habitual motion begins, first focus on when the dribble stops, the next logical action is a pass or shot. It always seems much clearer from this perspective.

On the floor ???!!!xsh)-%$!~ is not a proper verbalization in this circumstance.

In my coaching days I was often heard to ask "When did the foul occur?", where is inconsequential.

/rant off

I counted a shot this year just like this, one FT. I could have gone with the X, but chose not to.

The coach complained about the shot counting. I should have gone with the X.

Are we to assume the shot went in the basket?

X=Intentional?

I say that there is no way to tell from the above description whether A1 was in the act or not.

Why not?

Is he driving to the basket?

Has he gathered the ball (both hands on the ball)?

Then he has started the shooting motion - unless he passes it off, he was shooting. Give him his free throws.

When in doubt I give 'em 2 shots. Helps to discourage those types of fouls, IMO.

He was at the free throw line. He may have pulled up because B1 (who is 6' 10)
was blocking his path. A lot of variables are not spelled out in the OP.

Thanks for the responses! I thought I was interpreting the rule correctly. But when vets who are at a level I'd like to be, are like "no because he took 2 steps after the whistle" I had to bring it to the forum for clarification.

Afterall, this IS where I learned to apply so many of the rules correctly :D

Negative, although he gathered the ball he did not "pull up" it was a drive to the bucket.

Yeah - we all got that. Well, most of us got that.:rolleyes:

Yes, the ball went in. Yes, X = intentional.

Continuous Motion ...
 

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.

I agree.

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.

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.

This guy never passes
 

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

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.


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

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 :D

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."

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

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? :confused: :confused:

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.

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.

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.

I don't agree, but I respect it sir!

There's gotta be a reason you've had success in multiple State associations. Longevity is a real tale-tell.

I'm just trying to find my way

I use the rule of thumb. Nine times out of ten if there is initial contact there will be prolonged contact. This is why I stay with the play to see what happens.

Especially on a drive towards the basket, I just be patience with the whistle and come back and get the prolonged contact once the trying motion for goal begins.

Well, when do you say a try actually starts? Can you give me a couple of concrete examples of the deliniation between another motion/action ending and the try starting?

The whole point was that it is difficult to put on paper a concrete example of when the try has started. These are plays which, in my opinion, simply must be seen and judged individually as they happen. When a player gather the dribble and goes up for the shot, the time in between may be a negligible. But this same player may also pause in between for any number of reasons. Bottom line: A player ends a dribble and "immediately" releases a shot. Is it possible for a foul which occurs after the dribble ended to not be a shooting foul? yes

Well, aren't the rules written on paper? :)

While I don't necessarily disagree that there can be a distinctive "pause" between gathering the dribble and starting a try, in most cases that "pause" doesn't exist. That's why I asked you to give me your specific idea as to when a try starts. Are you saying, for example, that on a driving layup to the basket, there is a period of time (however small) between when the player gathers the ball from the dribble, and when the try/shot actually starts? I'm not talking about the drive, stop, head fake one way, shot the other way; I'm simply talking about the normal drive and layup.

To answer this, one would need a definition of when "gathering" starts and ends. I'm saying that the try does not start when the dribble ends, (when the ball is touched with two hands) but with some subsequent movement, which may be then recognized as part of a try. In many cases, these two separate actions may occur so close together that it might be impossible to separate the two.

(Which one of us is arguing with the possum?...) :D

We don't need a definition of "gathering". We already have a definition of when a dribble ends (4-15-4). We already have a definition of "continuous motion" (4-11). 4-11-2 is particularly relevant, in that it states: "...and if pivoting or stepping when fouled, may complete the usual foot or body movement in any activity while holding the ball". In the OP, the player was already holding the ball (dribble had ended), and stepping towards the basket (allowed in 4-11-2, assuming the foot movements were legal), so the foul would still be considered a shooting foul.

I'm still curious as to where specifically you feel a try actually starts? You seem to be saying, even on a straight drive for a layup, that there is some action/motion that happens in between when the player ends the dribble and when the try/shot actually starts. What is that action/motion? Now, I agree that a fake would preceed a try, so if a foul occured during a shot fake it would not be considered part of continuous motion. But, going back to the OP, if A1 ends the dribble on a fast drive near the FT line with both feet off the ground, the first step would be considered establishing the pivot foot, the second step would be lifting the pivot foot, and then the shot leaves the hand. Are you saying one of those actions, perhaps establishing the pivot foot, is not part of the shooting motion?

This discussion does seem to point out that many officials, coaches, and players are not aware that a try, and continuous motion, by rule, begins sooner than they think. This leads to many officials not awarding FT's on some plays where they should be awarded.

Let's not get too caught up in my success. I'm still doing a mostly JV schedule here. 2 years here, 2 years there hasn't helped, to be sure, but I'm not exactly busting down the doors to the state tournament yet.

Personally, this is an area where a lot of people differ I think.

My position is that there is nothing that a player can do with a foot alone which would constitute the beginning of a try. This foot movement would need to be accompanied by something which could be considered to be a part of the throwing motion.

4-11-1: .......foul.....during the interval which begins when the habitual throwing movement starts a try........

4-11-2: he........may complete the usual foot or body movement........
These privileges are granted only when the usual throwing motion has started.....

the rule states "begins when the habitual throwing movement starts"

On a drive where does the habitual throwing motion begin? On a drive the player is dribbling, he picks up the ball to go to the basket. A throwing motion to the basket starts when he picks up the ball. The player has two choices at that point pass or shoot.... If he doesnt pass then he was shooting.

On a set shot it is pretty obvious when the shot begins. If you have a quick player the dribbles and goes into an immediate jump shot (based on my experience) most of the time throwing motion is when he gathers the ball...

The casebook clearly states continuous motion ends if there is a dribble that starts...If the player catches the ball then the dribble ends....

Looking to casebook or rule book there is no further definition of habitual throwing motion. On a layup in my mind this is clear... I like what the NBA rule book states" The act of shooting starts when, in the official’s judgment, the player has started his shooting motion" .... Bottom line this is judgment when the shooting motion starts but too often high school officials but when the definition of continuous motion in NFHS and continuation of the NBA are nearly identical..we should be pretty consistent...

Or he could stop and do neither.

FWIW I believe that you are 100% correct. An official needs to see some movement to indicate that the player is attempting to score. It doesn't have to be much, but it does need to be more than simply ending a dribble or picking up the ball.

Really? Are you being realistic now? How many times have you seen a player dribbling on the move do this?

A player doing what the OP is doing is either going to shoot, pass, or travel. He is not going to stop on a dime. And if the player is fouled after stopping the dribble and before travelling then we as official need to judge whether he was shooting or passing. Way too often, IMO, HS officials want to make a point (often theactrically) of calling the foul "on the floor" or "before the shot" without any regard at all to continous motion or habitual throwing movement.

See the whole play.

You have never seen a player take the ball hard to the basket, then stop to let a defender fly by? Or you've never seen that same player stop, then have nowhere to go when the defender reads the play and doesn't fly by?
It happens. The majority of the time? no But it happens.

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 ???:confused:

See post #19

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.

While I don't disagree, I think ending the dribble can be the starting point of a shot attempt more often than some officials allow.

Let's say in the OP, as A1 takes the allowed strides towards the basket after ending the dribble, gets fouled, fakes a pass to the wing, then releases the ball towards the basket - I would agree this would not be a shooting foul. The foul preceded a pass attempt, not a shot.

But, as an example, continuous motion also specifically mentions a pivot. So a player can get fouled with their back to the basket at the start of a pivot, finish the pivot, take the step towards the basket and release the ball, and this should be a shooting foul. I think there are a number of officials that would not call this a shooting foul because they would feel the pivot and/or the following step would be actions preceding the actual shot. There are some that feel a shot would only be the action of the arms going up. But the rule specifically says, "...and if pivoting or stepping when fouled, may complete the usual foot or body movement in any activity while holding the ball".

You're right in that a blanket statement of "ending a dribble is the start of a shot" would not be correct. But it is correct more times than a lot of officials allow. That's my point - there is more to a try, by rule, than simply moving the arms to bring the ball above the head to release it.

Agreed.

There are way too many times where officials are in a rush to put the foul "on the floor". They don't watch the whole play or sometimes even take in to account common sense. Like when there is a 1-on-1 fast break and there is not another offensive player within 20-30 feet of the play.

But the very next sentence of the rule says: These privileges are granted only when the usual throwing motion has started before the foul occurs......

A throwing motion would involve the arms going up, would it not?

Does it say that?

What about an up-and-under move? If the foul occurs while A1 is bringing the ball down and around the defender, are you saying the "shot" only occurs while the ball is back on the way up?

[QUOTE=Ch1town;602096]Mens wreck last night:

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.

[QUOTE=Snaqwells;602743]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.

We only have what Ch1town gave us. Most of the time, when a player is dribbling, his feet are on the floor. Upon gathering the ball ? Snaqwells,This is when you find a pivot foot. Now if A1 takes 2 steps, Let's say 3 steps, 4 steps.
No shot, inbound the ball.
You can give 2 shots , with the five year old kids.

I don't think the key word is up. I think the key word is motion, but for it to be a shot at the basket, sooner or later it's gonna have to go up. As for your example, an up and under move, if the shooter gets whacked while going under, I don't think anybody would have a problem calling that part of the shooting motion.

I'm aware of the traveling rule, but thanks for the breakdown. However, on a coast-to-coast drive, players rarely gather the ball with a foot on the floor; this is why layups look like two steps. Is "takes 2 steps" really accurate? No, because he's really only stepping once before jumping once the pivot foot hits the floor.

That said, the popular perception is that it's two steps. And again, the obvious point of the OP was about the shooting motion starting, not questioning whether the player traveled. And Ch1town had already clarified that point in this post:

Exactly. In the OP, I believe his frustration was in being told that if A1 is fouled during the step(s) preceding the release, that is not considered part of the shot. Continuous motion (4-11) tells us there is more to "the habitual throwing movement" than simply moving the arms upward immediately prior to releasing the ball.

I think there are still a number of officials that unfairly penalize a player by calling a foul "before the shot", when in fact it is during the shooting motion. The "habitual throwing movement" can include foot and body movements, even a pivot. It doesn't have to include only "going up for the shot".

Great job of getting to the rim, now take it out & start all over again :eek:

Maybe in the NBE!!!!!

Actually all 3 codes are very similar
 

1. Straight out of the HS rule book:
SECTION 11 CONTINUOUS MOTION

ART.1...Continuous motion applies to a try or tap for field goals and free throws, but it has no significance unless there is a foul by the defense during the interval which begins when the habitual throwing movement starts a try or with the touching on a tap and ends when the ball is clearly in flight.

ART.2...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.

2. Straight out of the NCAA rule book:
SECTION 14. Continuous Motion

Continuous motion applies to a try or tap for field goals or free throws, but it has no significance unless there is a foul by the defense during the interval which begins when the habitual throwing movement starts a try or with the touching on a tap and ends when the ball is clearly in flight.

3. Straight out of the NBA Casebook:
RULE 4 - SECTION XI

46. Player A1 is fouled just as he is completing his dribble and gathering the ball. If he continues his shooting motion and scores a successful basket, how many free throws are awarded?

Since the player’s shooting motion continued and he was fouled upon gathering the ball, the basket shall count and Player A1 will receive one free throw attempt.

yep, they're virtually the same. I love it when you count a basket and hear, "This isn't the NBA" from the coach.

One time, after a coach was whining to me about my partner's call, I told him that the rule is the same whether it's the NBA, college, or high school. He was incredulous. :eek:

Right, that's why I just walk away at that point any more. Best of all worlds.
I have someone to write about here, I get to walk away, and I get to feel smug at the same time.