The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 02, 2009, 11:50am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Posts: 214
a little help.....

ok, I have a situation I just thought of, but my books are at home .

A1 shooting 2nd of 2 ft's. A2 commits a lane violation during shooting motion (immediate violation, dead ball, no ft). That I know...

But say B1 goaltends the released ft, even though the released ft never really counts due to A2 violating. My question is, is this still a technical foul and goaltending enforcement on B1 for goaltending a ft? Even though the ft was killed by A2 violating?

If it IS a T, it would be 2 ft and division line throw in opposite the table for team A. If it is NOT a T, would it just be b's sopt throw in on end line?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 02, 2009, 11:58am
Ch1town
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Good one!

I'd like to think a GT cannot occur because of the whistle to kill the FT... no live ball.

Don't have my books either, someone should be along to clarify sooner than later.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 02, 2009, 12:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,898
No GT...ball is dead....B's ball due to the FT violation.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 02, 2009, 12:41pm
CLH CLH is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 293
Send a message via AIM to CLH Send a message via Yahoo to CLH
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
No GT...ball is dead....B's ball due to the FT violation.
I concur...
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 02, 2009, 12:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 751
Correct...

The Case Book play in 9.12 refers to A2 entering the lane and committing basket interference. The interference is ignored because the free throw attempted ended with the violation.

Even with B committing the interference, the free throw ended on the violation.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 02, 2009, 12:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,621
Quote:
Originally Posted by vbzebra View Post
But say B1 goaltends the released ft, even though the released ft never really counts due to A2 violating. My question is, is this still a technical foul and goaltending enforcement on B1 for goaltending a ft? Even though the ft was killed by A2 violating?
First of all, goaltending is a violation, not a technical foul. So even if we had goaltending, it couldn't "still" be a T because it's never a T.

Second, since you recognize that the FT was canceled, you should realize that it's impossible to goaltend a shot that never occurred.

No violation. B's ball for an end-line throw-in.
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 02, 2009, 12:50pm
Ch1town
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron View Post
First of all, goaltending is a violation, not a technical foul. So even if we had goaltending, it couldn't "still" be a T because it's never a T.
Even on a FT sir?
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 02, 2009, 12:51pm
CLH CLH is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 293
Send a message via AIM to CLH Send a message via Yahoo to CLH
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron View Post
First of all, goaltending is a violation, not a technical foul. So even if we had goaltending, it couldn't "still" be a T because it's never a T.

Second, since you recognize that the FT was canceled, you should realize that it's impossible to goaltend a shot that never occurred.

No violation. B's ball for an end-line throw-in.
Try again...goaltending during a free throw is a technical foul...this occured a couple years ago in the mens ncaa tournament...
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 02, 2009, 12:54pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,621
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ch1town View Post
Even on a FT sir?
OK. I learned something today, namely 10-3-9.
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 02, 2009, 12:59pm
Ch1town
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron View Post
OK. I learned something today, namely 10-3-9.
The never ending process
That's why I love this place, you can learn from others before messing them up on the court.

Helluva tool for officials!
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 02, 2009, 01:18pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 168
Send a message via AIM to tjchamp
What is the situation that would cause a person to goaltend a free throw if they didn't know it was a T?
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 02, 2009, 01:21pm
CLH CLH is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 293
Send a message via AIM to CLH Send a message via Yahoo to CLH
The number one reason would be stupidity

A couple years ago a coach told his player to goaltend a free throw late in a close game during the NCAA Men's tournament. He knew it would get them the ball back no matter what, which was what he wanted to accomplish. However; he didn't realize the technical foul rule, thankfully the referees did and handled the situation correctly. Of course, the referees were blamed for the loss until the coach found the rule and exonnerated the crew, lol..
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 02, 2009, 04:20pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLH View Post
The number one reason would be stupidity

A couple years ago a coach told his player to goaltend a free throw late in a close game during the NCAA Men's tournament. He knew it would get them the ball back no matter what, which was what he wanted to accomplish. However; he didn't realize the technical foul rule, thankfully the referees did and handled the situation correctly. Of course, the referees were blamed for the loss until the coach found the rule and exonerated the crew, lol..
The shooting team was ahead with little time left and the coach's goal was to prevent the clock from starting...and to concede the point as they were, IIRC, down by 1 prior to the final FT.

As I remember it, I don't think the coach blamed the refs...sure, he reacted at the moment of the call but the refs immediately explained it and it was over.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 02, 2009, 04:30pm
Ch1town
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
As I remember it, I don't think the coach blamed the refs...sure, he reacted at the moment of the call but the refs immediately explained it and it was over.
Closure? In officiating... say it ain't so
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:05am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1