debate between me and another

[representing]

Originally Posted by tjones1

I think you need to read 4.19.8 Situation C.

Not really my situation explained though, since the shooter never got airborne. This was not a shooting situation, but an on-the-floor situation.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by representing

Not really my situation explained though, since the shooter never got airborne. This was not a shooting situation, but an on-the-floor situation.

That's not the point of the case play. Opposing prelims on a block charge play equal a double foul. Nevada's tagline is tongue in cheek.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by representing

This was a block/charge play, couldn't have been double foul.

I couldn't agree more. See how logical this sounds?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by representing

Not really my situation explained though, since the shooter never got airborne. This was not a shooting situation, but an on-the-floor situation.

What does contact with the floor or being airborne have to do with the act of shooting?

That case play definitely covers your situation. If there is no try for goal on the play, then you apply the POI rule and resume accordingly as detailed in the following interp.

2005-06 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations
SITUATION 8: A1 has control of the ball in Team A's frontcourt. Post players A5 and B5 are pushing each other in an attempt to gain a more advantageous position on the block while (a) A1 is dribbling the ball; (b) the ball is in the air on a pass from A1 to A2; or (c) the ball is in the air on an unsuccessful try for goal by A1. An official calls a double personal foul on A5 and B5. RULING: In (a) and (b), Team A had control of the ball when the double foul occurred, and thus play will be resumed at the point of interruption. Team A will have a designated spot throw-in nearest the location where the ball was located when the double foul occurred. In (c), no team has control while a try for goal is in flight, and since the try was unsuccessful, there is no obvious point of interruption. Play will be resumed with an alternating possession throw-in nearest the location where the ball was located when the double foul occurred. Had the try been successful, the point of interruption would have been a throw-in for Team B from anywhere along the end line. (4-36; 6-4-3g; 7-5-9)

Originally Posted by just another ref

I couldn't agree more. See how logical this sounds?

Sounds inexperienced with a great deal to learn to me.

[tbarron]

I had almost the exact same thing happen tonight. A had the ball, B head coach called timeout. I blew the whistle and when I realized the wrong team called the timeout, I gave the ball back to A at the nearest point, did not grant the timeout. I don't understand the logic of AP your buddy was talking about.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tbarron

I had almost the exact same thing happen tonight. A had the ball, B head coach called timeout. I blew the whistle and when I realized the wrong team called the timeout, I gave the ball back to A at the nearest point, did not grant the timeout. I don't understand the logic of AP your buddy was talking about.

I don't understand why you didn't give the timeout.

As for the AP, some people have it in their heads that everytime there's an IW, the answer is the arrow.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I don't understand why you didn't give the timeout.

I don't either. Once the whistle is sounded, for whatever reason, correct, or incorrect, the ball is dead. Once the ball is dead, either team can request, and be granted, a timeout, with rare exceptions for injured, or disqualified players, successive with 0:00, etc.

[APG]

Originally Posted by representing

Not really my situation explained though, since the shooter never got airborne. This was not a shooting situation, but an on-the-floor situation.

A matter of semantics, but just because the foul happened "on the floor" does not mean it isn't a shooting foul. A player can be held so that they may not leave the floor but still start the shooting motion. In that case, we'd still award the player with 2/3 shoots.