Lane Spaces

[Indianaref]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

Am I reading 9-1-3(g) correctly?

A player occupying a marked lane space may not have either foot beyond the vertical plane marked by the lane line or either neutral zone line (2 X 36 or 12 X 36) but can break the vertical plane (with either foot) that would make up the back of their 36 X 36 lane space.

..."The other foot may be positioned anywhere within the designated 36" lane space."

As I read it they want one foot positioned "near" the free throw lane line and the other maybe positioned anywhere, but within the 36" x 36" designated lane space.

The word "near" is subjective.

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by Indianaref

..."The other foot may be positioned anywhere within the designated 36" lane space."

As I read it they want one foot positioned "near" the free throw lane line and the other maybe positioned anywhere, but within the 36" x 36" designated lane space.

The word "near" is subjective.

My curiosity is about breaking the vertical plane (with either foot) on the back side of the 36 X 36 lane space prior to the ball touching the ring, backboard or the FT ending.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

My curiosity is about breaking the vertical plane (with either foot) on the back side of the 36 X 36 lane space prior to the ball touching the ring, backboard or the FT ending.

Asked and answered. It's not allowed.

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Asked and answered. It's not allowed.

Since I'm not busy, let me ask another question.

I believe you and understand that it is not allowed. It just makes sense. But, am I misreading 9-1-3(g) or is this something that has been decided outside of the ruling in 9-1-3(g)?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

Since I'm not busy, let me ask another question.

I believe you and understand that it is not allowed. It just makes sense. But, am I misreading 9-1-3(g) or is this something that has been decided outside of the ruling in 9-1-3(g)?

You're not misreading it. You're misinterpreting it.

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by mbyron

You're not misreading it. You're misinterpreting it.

Like I said I'm not busy and I'm trying to get my post count up to 8,000 , so here goes my interpretion. Where am I missing the back lane space boundary?

". . . outside edge of any lane boundary" = that bounded by the lane line itself

". . . (2 inches by 36 inches) designated by a lane space mark" = that bounded on the left or right of a player as marked by the 2X8 lane space marking.

". . . (12 inches by 36 inches) designated by a neutral zone." = that bounded on the left or right of a player as marked by the 12X8 neutral zone marking.

I can't find (interpret) what it takes to violate the 4th boundary.

[Vinski]

9-1-3

g. A player occupying a marked lane space may not have either foot beyond the vertical plane of the outside edge of any lane boundary, or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (2 inches by 36 inches) designated by a lane-space mark or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (12 inches by 36 inches) designated by a neutral zone. A player shall position one foot near the outer edge of the free-throw lane line. The other foot may be positioned anywhere within the designated 36-inch lane space.

This statement, along with...

d. No player shall enter a marked lane space or leave a marked lane space by contacting the court outside the 36-inch by 36-inch space.

...pretty much says it.

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

My curiosity is about breaking the vertical plane (with either foot) on the back side of the 36 X 36 lane space prior to the ball touching the ring, backboard or the FT ending.

Thats correct, they can not break the vertical plane. I had to do a double take on that as well.