Foul on a Free Throw

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

For boxing out a shooter?

Nope for FOULING a FREE THROW shooter. That is supposed to be "an unhindered try for goal." A foul is illegal contact which certainly hinders a player's movement.
Boxing out is legal action which should never be penalized.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

You are correct, bob. I overlooked the fact that 4-19-2 says, "for a field goal." I was going off memory instead of looking up the rule in the book, and thought that it just said, "a try for goal."

However, the player is certainly an airborne shooter as that rule 4-1-1 does state "on a try for a goal." It does not specify "field" goal.

Agree that s/he is an airborne shooter. Not sure why it matters. Since it wasn't a 2- or 3-point attempt, it's not a "shooting foul" (an undefined term -- but I mean the peanlty is not Pentaly 2 or 5 in teh Penatlies Summary),

So, it's "just" a common foul -- ball OOB or bonus FTs.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Agree that s/he is an airborne shooter. Not sure why it matters. Since it wasn't a 2- or 3-point attempt, it's not a "shooting foul" (an undefined term -- but I mean the peanlty is not Pentaly 2 or 5 in teh Penatlies Summary),

So, it's "just" a common foul -- ball OOB or bonus FTs.

I can live with the ruling. It seems reasonable to me. I would prefer the NFHS to add a part c to number 5 in the penalty section for Rule 10 or a Case Book ruling for this situation, but even if this has to fall under 2-3 what you write makes good sense.

I guess we're back to "always listen to bob."