Free Throw Lane Violation?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Gargil

Last night late in a boys varsity game team A was fouled and lined up for a 2 shot freethrow. Team B was huddling at mid court, A1 was shooting and A2 and A3 were occupying the second lane spaces. The L puts the ball at the disposal of the shooter and he misses, The L then calls a lane violation because nobody from Team B was occupying the first two lane spaces. A1 was awarded another try. Team B coach was not happy. Does the defensive team have to occupy the first two lane spaces? I thought they were not required to occupy these but the offensive team could not occupy the first two lane spaces. FYI, The shooter missed all 3 shots.

The officials should have directed B to occupy the first two spots. If they refused, then the officials should have issued a T. No violation; no "delay of game" warning.

(IF this had been after a TO, then use the "resumption of play" procedure before the T.)

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The officials should have directed B to occupy the first two spots. If they refused, then the officials should have issued a T. No violation; no "delay of game" warning.

(IF this had been after a TO, then use the "resumption of play" procedure before the T.)

aka case book play 10.1.5SitC

[Gargil]

I will have to pay closer attention to wording when reading the books, "shall occupy". I will file this away and consider myself a little more knowledgable.

[Upward ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

aka case book play 10.1.5SitC

Exact same situation . Didn't think there were too many instances where the official directs the players to comply with the rule , and then whacks 'em if they don't !

[hoopguy]

Bob, why is there not a delay-of-game warning given in this situation? The players are huddling, but not in the lane(as per the case play). To me this is delaying the administration of the free thows as per the ruling in A of your case play. The difference being where the huddle is occurring. I hate to disagree with Bob because I am probably wrong

A very similar situation occurred in a game I was doing. The shooting foul was being administered and the entire non shooting team was huddling with their coach on the backcourt side of the court. We asked the players to occupy the inside spaces but I think we should have given the dog warning.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by hoopguy

Bob, why is there not a delay-of-game warning given in this situation?

Because the case play JurassicRef provided 70 minutes before your question says it's a T.

A very similar situation occurred in a game I was doing. The shooting foul was being administered and the entire non shooting team was huddling with their coach on the backcourt side of the court. We asked the players to occupy the inside spaces but I think we should have given the dog warning.

You (as a crew) got it right. Next time, you'll lead the effort to get it right.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by hoopguy

Bob, why is there not a delay-of-game warning given in this situation? The players are huddling, but not in the lane(as per the case play). To me this is delaying the administration of the free thows as per the ruling in A of your case play. The difference being where the huddle is occurring. I hate to disagree with Bob because I am probably wrong

A very similar situation occurred in a game I was doing. The shooting foul was being administered and the entire non shooting team was huddling with their coach on the backcourt side of the court. We asked the players to occupy the inside spaces but I think we should have given the dog warning.

Difference being, in the Case Play the huddle prevents you from administering the free throw; in your play, the free throw can be administered but the defensive players are now failing to occupy their mandatory positions.

[BillyMac]

Here's a little twist, remember, if offensive players are in the first lane space, it's a double violation. Against the defensive players for not being there, and against the offensive players for being there.

[justacoach]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Here's a little twist, remember, if offensive players are in the first lane space, it's a double violation. Against the defensive players for not being there, and against the offensive players for being there.

Know this to be true but too lazy to look it up. Rules cite, pls.

Thanks