![]() |
|
|||
Tech or violation?
play :
official bounces ball to f.thrower and backs out. Before the shot leaves shooter's hands, official notices that opponent is not occupying bottom block. Do you extend delayed violation signal for not occupying bottom block or is this a tech? Please spare me the "officials should always check to make sure bottom blocks are occupied properly" sermon. Mulk
__________________
Mulk |
|
|||
Quote:
9.1.2 SITUATION B: A1 is shooting the first of a bonus free-throw situation. A4 and A5 are positioned in the first two marked lane spaces (near the end line) and 4 and B5 are positioned in the second two marked lane spaces. The incorrect alignment is discovered by the officials (a) before the ball is at the disposal of A1; (b) after the ball is at A1's disposal, but before the try is in flight; (c) when the try is in flight; (d) when the successful try goes through the cylinder; (e) when the unsuccessful try is rebounding off the basket ring; or (f) when the rebound of the unsuccessful try is securely in A4's possession. RULING: In (a), the administering official shall "reset" the free throw and put the players in their proper marked lane spaces. In (b) and (c) an official shall sound his/her whistle immediately and call a simultaneous violation, utilizing the alternating-possession procedure to put the ball in play. In (d), (e) and (f) the free throw has ended and the improper alignment is ignored. (4-20-3; 9-1-2 Penalty 3) |
|
|||
More Info, Please
Was this due to a delay deserving of the ROP procedure? If so, then 9.1.2A seems to answer the question.
If a delay of another sort kept the spaces from being filled, then 10.1.5C would prevail. What other circumstance would have resulted the administering official bouncing the ball to the free thrower with one space empty ? No homiletics here, just trying to understand the situation you cite. Last edited by Freddy; Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 11:44pm. |
|
|||
If the defense and offense were in opposite spaces then 9.1.2 Situation B has the solution.
However, I think the OP is saying that the first space is just not occupied by anyone...I would just have a violation (although it shouldn't happen... oops, wasn't suppose to say that ![]() |
|
|||
no doubt that we had our heads up our asses to let this happen but happen it did. We have been discussing 10.1.5.c for the past couple of weeks and the T is IF there is a delay in complying to the official's request to occupy the lane. Right? And, not because the block was unoccupied?
The 9.1.2 ruling leads me to believe that is merely a violation for not being in the bottom block. Right?
__________________
Mulk |
|
|||
Quote:
Correct. Just a violation. |
|
|||
Why should you be spared the sermon? You screwed up a call -- so what, we all do that. Thicken that skin.
The answers so far seem to be "if you're going to ignore the officials' error, then call a violation." But why ignore the error? If you rushed to put the ball at the disposal of the thrower before everyone was set, whistle it dead, do it right, and don't penalize either team for your mistakes.
__________________
Cheers, mb |
|
|||
Quote:
Of course, if the attempt is successful, then the violation is simply ignored, but a verbal warning to get to those spaces would be in order. |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
tech or not? | kbilla | Basketball | 18 | Wed Jan 24, 2007 09:58am |
Violation or Tech? | Ron Giacoma | Basketball | 3 | Sat Jan 20, 2007 10:47am |
Question - Swinging Elbows - Tech or Violation | bradfordwilkins | Basketball | 5 | Sun Feb 20, 2005 09:25pm |
Tech or Throw in Violation? | Larks | Basketball | 26 | Sun Oct 19, 2003 04:27pm |
NEED IMMEDIATE HELP on a TECH | sip | Basketball | 3 | Tue Feb 29, 2000 01:41am |