.3 Foul Question
 

.3 seconds left. A1 catches the lob throw-in and is immediately fouled.

Do I ignore the foul unless I determine it to be flagrant or intentional? Is the ball dead as soon as it's deemed that A1 caught the ball instead of tapping it?

No rule makes the ball dead here. Call the foul as you would any other time until the horn blows to make the ball dead.

If the foul happens after he releases a shot (assuming he caught it first), it's a dead ball contact situation (ignore or go with a T or flagrant).
The rule says they can't catch or shoot, it doesn't say they can't catch and be fouled trying to shoot.

Exactly. A1, seeing and anticipating the imminent contact, may have grabbed the ball instead of tapping it as a result. B shouldn't be able to foul to prevent A1 from tapping the ball.

The ball doesn't become dead until 0.3 seconds after A1 touches/grabs the ball.

Here's The Catch ...
 

If Team A is in the bonus, A1 shoots a one and one. If Team A is in the double bonus, A1 shoots two free throws.

Disagree. Nothing says A1 can't start the shooting motion in that amount of time.

5.2.5 SITUATION C: With three-tenths of a second or less left in a tied game, each team is in the bonus. Team A has a throw-in on the end line near their basket. A1 throws the ball to A5 on the near block who catches the ball and quickly shoots. A5 is fouled by B3 just prior to the period ending horn. The ball goes through A's basket. RULING: Since A5 may not control the ball and attempt a try with three-tenths of a second or less, A5 cannot score a goal and is not considered in the act of shooting. However, B3's foul cannot be ignored and is considered a common foul. A5 is awarded a one-and-one bonus free-throw situation with the lane cleared. A5's free throw attempts will determine if the game is over or if an overtime period is necessary. (4-41-6)

Not the way I am reading 5.2.5 C

NCAA is different. Ignore the contact unless I or F.

AR 132

If he catches it, he cannot shoot it and have the goal count. So, if he is fouled, he cannot be considered to be fouled in the act of shooting. And the OP said 'catch'.

I don't know how much clearer you can get than 5-2-5...

When play is resumed with a throw-in or free throw and threetenths (.3) of a second or less remains on the clock, a player may not gain control of the ball and try for a field goal. In this situation only a tap could score.

Piling on?

Twist And Shout ???
 

New twist. What if we add this to 5.2.5 SITUATION C: The ball doesn't go through A's basket, but instead B4 commits basket interference?

If it hadn't been for the case play, which states "A5 cannot score a goal and is not considered in the act of shooting," I would maintain my opinion. Nothing in the rule itself says he can't be in the act of shooting, only that he can't score. "May not ...try for a goal" is up to interpretation. However, the case play makes it pretty clear.

So, apparently, it can get a lot clearer than 5-2-5. In fact, it does in 5.2.5C.

Edit: This is a long winded way of saying, "I was wrong."

The ball would be dead prior to the BI, so it wouldn't affect anything.

I would say that the ball was dead at the common foul, so, no BI.

I'm not going to say this is impossible, but it's so highly improbable that we can safely ignore it. The ball becomes dead at the horn, since the throw toward the basket is not a try. Since there's only 0.3 on the clock, whatever B4 does is almost certainly done after the ball is dead.

I read BM's case as suggesting a violation instead of a foul.

Oh, my bad, then my answer is found in post #17.

I would say it becomes dead as soon as the try is released, or the horn blows, whichever happens first.

So, now you're accusing me of plagiarism?!? :D

Agree IF the shooting motion is a tap. The player can be fouled in the act of tapping and be awarded 2 shots.

All doubters see NFHS rules 4-41-1,5&6 and case book play 5.2.5SitB

Question referred specifically to a player catching the ball. Tap was not an option.

Someone might judge that the player was trying to tap the ball when fouled but grabbed it as a result of getting fouled. Hmmm. :eek:

or as a result of imminent contact?

That doesn't matter because the "act of tapping" doesn't start until the ball is touched.

IMO, with .3 left, if the player is trying to tap, s/he will tap and not catch the ball no matter what the contact.

If it's a catch, then it's a common foul and not a shooting foul.

Snaq, the rule says, "...a player may not gain control of the ball and try for a field goal. "

He can't try for goal equals he can't shoot.

If he can't shoot, he can't be in the act of shooting.

Seems pretty clear to me.

That's got nuthin' to do with Snaq's statement. Snaq said "Nothing says A can't start the shooting motion in that amount of time.". That statement is true IF the shooting motion is a tap. It isn't true if the shooting motion is a try.

This is the original post. We observe but do not pretend we are Kreskin. Any answers to the OP must address that the ball was CAUGHT. Arguments about tapping, etc. are not germane to the original post. A thread that had A1 tapping instead of catching is an entirely different topic.

Actually it has everything to do with it. The fact that the ball had been caught was a given. The question was what could or could not happen next.

Yep, and I was wrong, according to the case play.

I agree with your logic on the play. Knowing the shot would not count, (how many of the players know this?) if the defender is dumb enough to foul a player who starts a shooting motion, it would not be unreasonable to penalize accordingly.