Foul on a Free Throw

[stosh]

NCAA rules in an AAU game.

A1 is at the free throw line shooting the second of 2 shots. Team A is not yet in the bonus. After A1 releases the ball but before it hits the rim or goes in, (she never leaves the floor) B1 comes in to box her out and knocks her to the floor. Too much contact to ignore. My partner calls the foul but now confers with me whether it is a technical foul, a shooting foul, or just a common foul. He thinks it is a T; I think it is just a common foul with team A getting the ball out of bounds. My justification is that since the ball was live, it can't be a T.

Of course NFHS would be a different story. There I say it would be a T since the violation by B1 caused ti to become a dead ball.

Any thoughts?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by stosh

There I say it would be a T since the violation by B1 caused ti to become a dead ball.

Any thoughts?

Why does a violation by B cause the ball to be dead?

[SAK]

Originally Posted by stosh

Of course NFHS would be a different story. There I say it would be a T since the violation by B1 caused ti to become a dead ball.

Any thoughts?

You have a delayed lane violation because its the non shooting team that violated. If it was the shooting team that violated you have an immediate violation but you wait to see what happens when B violates.

Also, on a 1 and 1 or the last of either a 2 shot foul or 3 shot foul the ball is live when the shooter gets it. So you no longer have a dead ball foul and an automatic T. Its a common foul unless you rule intentional.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by SAK

Also, on a 1 and 1 or the last of either a 2 shot foul or 3 shot foul the ball is live when the shooter gets it. So you no longer have a dead ball foul and an automatic T. Its a common foul unless you rule intentional.

Correction: The ball is always live when the shooter has it, regardless. If there are no more free throws to follow, and rebounders along the lane, it reamins live even on a miss. It becomes dead on the miss if, for whatever reason, there will be no rebound.

[ref3808]

Brand new to this but under NFHS ... if I remember my class ... the violation is a delayed violation since it's on the defense. If it went in count the hoop, ignore the violation, report the foul, and give the ball to A OOB. If it's a miss, report the foul and violation, readminister the free throw with the lane cleared and give the ball to A OOB to penalize the foul. Did I get it right?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by ref3808

Brand new to this but under NFHS ... if I remember my class ... the violation is a delayed violation since it's on the defense. If it went in count the hoop, ignore the violation, report the foul, and give the ball to A OOB. If it's a miss, report the foul and violation, readminister the free throw with the lane cleared and give the ball to A OOB to penalize the foul. Did I get it right?

Yup.

[sseltser]

Originally Posted by stosh

(she never leaves the floor)

Related question:

A1 jumps to shoot a free throw and is fouled by B1 before returning to the floor. A1's free throw is a)unsuccessful or b) successful. Ruling?

I am going to look it up, but I thought the discussion would be useful concerning live ball, try, free throw rules, etc.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by sseltser

Related question:

A1 jumps to shoot a free throw and is fouled by B1 before returning to the floor. A1's free throw is a)unsuccessful or b) successful. Ruling?

I am going to look it up, but I thought the discussion would be useful concerning live ball, try, free throw rules, etc.

While logic might suggest that the penalty would be 1 shot in either case, there is no defined penaly for being fouled in the act of shooting a FT aside from being in the bonus. The defined penalties only reference being fouled in a 2 point try or a 3 point try.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by stosh

Of course NFHS would be a different story. There I say it would be a T since the violation by B1 caused ti to become a dead ball.

Any thoughts?

The whole delayed dead ball thing has been addressed. but your assertion about it being a T because the ball is dead but that this otherwise common foul is "too much contact to ignore" is incorrect as well.

NFHS 4-19-1 Note "Contact after the ball has become dead is ignored unless it is ruled intentional or flagrant or is committed by or on an airborne shooter."

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by sseltser

Related question:

A1 jumps to shoot a free throw and is fouled by B1 before returning to the floor. A1's free throw is a)unsuccessful or b) successful. Ruling?

I am going to look it up, but I thought the discussion would be useful concerning live ball, try, free throw rules, etc.

Nasty, nasty question!

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

While logic might suggest that the penalty would be 1 shot in either case, there is no defined penaly for being fouled in the act of shooting a FT aside from being in the bonus. The defined penalties only reference being fouled in a 2 point try or a 3 point try.

A correct answer. The NFHS does not have rules coverage for a foul in this situation. Per the definitions of airborne shooter, common foul, personal foul, this foul cannot be a common foul. It is committed against and airborne shooter and therefore must be a personal foul. However, as Camron notes, there is no penalty listed in the book. I love learning stuff like this! I'll note here that there is a similar problem for the bonus as nowhere in the NFHS rules does it state to award the first FT of the 1-and-1 for common fouls 7, 8, and 9 of a half.

My solution: Call such a foul an intentional personal foul for taking a cheap shot at the FT shooter while he is in a defenseless position and assess the penalty for that. 2 FTs and possession of the ball.

[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.

[Lotto]

Originally Posted by stosh

NCAA rules in an AAU game.

A1 is at the free throw line shooting the second of 2 shots. Team A is not yet in the bonus. After A1 releases the ball but before it hits the rim or goes in, (she never leaves the floor) B1 comes in to box her out and knocks her to the floor. Too much contact to ignore. My partner calls the foul but now confers with me whether it is a technical foul, a shooting foul, or just a common foul. He thinks it is a T; I think it is just a common foul with team A getting the ball out of bounds. My justification is that since the ball was live, it can't be a T.

Of course NFHS would be a different story. There I say it would be a T since the violation by B1 caused ti to become a dead ball.

Any thoughts?

I assume that B1 is in a lane space. Then, if you're using NCAA rules, there is no violation by B1, who is allowed to come into the lane as soon as A1 releases the ball. This is a common foul on B1. Give A1 FTs if it is B's 7th foul, otherwise give the ball for a throw-in by A on the endline.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

My solution: Call such a foul an intentional personal foul for taking a cheap shot at the FT shooter while he is in a defenseless position and assess the penalty for that. 2 FTs and possession of the ball.

For boxing out a shooter?

[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.