Foul on a Free Throw

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Per the definitions of airborne shooter, common foul, personal foul, this foul cannot be a common foul.

Why can't this be a common foul? A common foul excludes a player trying for a FIELD GOAL, but not one trying a FT. A try for field goal is a 2- or 3-point attempt (see 4-41-2)

[hoopguy]

I am pretty sure that this should be called a technical foul under NCAA-W. There used to be video examples for NCAA-W that was free$ last year(I posted a thread complaining about this) and I am sure one of the videos used this exact example and I believe the ruling was this should be a technical foul. I can't back this up since I can no longer view those videos. I AM positive that this foul is used in their videos but not 100% sure about the violation.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Why can't this be a common foul? A common foul excludes a player trying for a FIELD GOAL, but not one trying a FT. A try for field goal is a 2- or 3-point attempt (see 4-41-2)

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.

[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."