Disagree. When the referee decides to call the foul or actually blows the whistle is irrelevant. The time of the act that the referee determines is a foul, even if it takes a second or two for the referee to decide, is the time the ball becomes dead. That is a pretty basic fundamental of the rules and I'm surprised you're even suggesting otherwise. The infraction itself makes the ball dead at the time of the infraction. The referee is only confirming the fact.

Otherwise, having a patient whistle could open up some very undesirable situations....

A1 travels and then immediately collides with B1 for what would be an obvious block or charge. The referee then decides that the travel came first. If the ball remains live until the whistle is blown, are you calling the travel and the foul?

A2 fouls B1 just before A1 releases a shot. The referee decides it was a foul and blows the whistle just after A1 released the shot. It was clear that A2 fouled before the release. Does the shot count since the referee didn't decide/blow until after the release?

A1, not yet in the shooting motion, is fouled by B1 and then runs into B3 for either an obvious block or a charge (doesn't really matter which for the purposes of this discussion) all before you can make a judgement and blow the whistle for the first contact. Are you saying that the rules support the ball remaining live after the first contact/foul such that the second contact is also subject to a common foul. Or is the ball dead on the first contact?

Let's go back to Square One....

See above.....

By rule, the ball was live on the throw-in as soon as it was at the disposal of the thrower. The ball was still live after the throw-in ended. Once the throw-in ended, it was too late by rule to go back and change anything.

They then effectively would shoot a dead ball by rule ONLY if the official had called a technical foul...or had decided to call a technical foul and had not blown the whistle for it yet ... BEFORE the shot left the shooter's hand. If the official decided to call a technical foul after the shot was in the air, by rule the ball remains live until the shot is made or missed.

That was my point.

I don't presume to speak for Camron, but I think his point is this. Is a technical foul different from a personal foul? The action which caused the foul is what causes the ball to become dead, not the official's decision to make the call, and not the whistle.

Exactly....and it is a pretty basic rule.

The dead ball rule doesn't differentiate between types of foul....just that a foul, when it occurs, makes the ball dead (with exceptions for continuous motion and a try already in the air). The whistle only causes the ball to become dead when it is not for an infraction or not already dead for an infraction.

Basketball rules fundamental....

16. The official’s whistle seldom causes the ball to become dead (it is already dead).

In this case, the infraction, when it is committed, causes the ball to become dead immediately, not the whistle itself nor after the after the time it takes for the official to recognize the infraction. If the shot is not in the air when the foul occurs, it can not count. In this case, the foul clearly occurred before the try was in the air.

No matter how many times you say "by rule", it will not change what the rule actually says.

How are you saying "by rule"? The rules do not support what you are saying. The ball becomes dead when the foul occurs not when the official decides to call it.

Tell Camron that.

Sigh....

Back to Square 1 again....so there is absolutely no confusion.

The correct ruling in this case is that the play stands as written.Team A will shoot the free throws for the foul on the shot attempt and team B will get the arrow.

Nothing that happened above can be changed by rule. And the pertinent rules and case plays have already been cited.

And my point is that in the OP there was absolutely nothing that occurred that would make the ball dead before the foul call. And if the attempted shot where the foul occurred went in, it would have counted.

I was also agreeing that a technical foul being called before the shot attempt would also make the ball dead.

I have no idea how we got seem to have gotten so far off track from that.

The call is not what makes the ball dead. It is when the foul occurs. When did it occur in this case? The team used devious methods to accept a throw-in to which it was not entitled. The ball was dead when they threw it in. No basket.

Say what?

Howinthehell can the ball be dead on the throw-in if there NEVER was a whistle? There NEVER was a technical foul called. There was NO whistle for a technical foul EVER.

You have absolutely no rules justification to state that the ball was dead. And if you think differently, cite a rule to back it up.

Did you even bother to read case book play 6.4.1SitD?

That's ridiculous!

Are you blind or just playing dumb?

The rule AND the rule fundamental have been cited, both of which clearly refute your assertion that it takes the whistle to actually make the ball dead.

The case you're citing has NOTHING to do with a a foul, much less an unsportsmanlike foul. It refers to a simple throwin mistake in isolation.

Once again, when the official decides to call an unsportsmanlike technical foul and/or blows the whistle, the ball is retroactively dead to the time of the act that drew the technical foul. Rule 6-7-7 (note the word "occurs") and rule fundamental 16.

So, Camron, what you are basically saying is that you would have handled the updated scenario stated earlier in the thread in this way:

V throws ball in, shoots and makes a three pointer. H Coach jumps up and yells "Hey, wait a minute..." You then realize that V should not have had the throw-in, decide they did it purposely, and then take the three points off the board/out of the scorebook, and assess a T on the V Coach.

Is that really what you are saying here?

No. I'm addressing the situation here.....

...where is becomes apparent that V knew exactly what they were doing. I consider that unsportsmanlike. Without that, you have no indication that it was anything but confusion.

You really don't know that it was not confusion on the players part, and a Coach who just happens to know the rule that says once the throw-in is completed it is too late to fix it...player is confused, coach recognized what was happening...so you are guessing that the Coach set it all up during the time-out?

+1