Free Throw Situation

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Maybe he just does it to piss you off. That's a worthy cause.

Hm, sounds like crankypuss didn't get his hugs this morning.

[ARef]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Case 8.6.2 (2009-10 book) should do it. The first foul is a T with the second foul (flagrant in the case play, but irrelevant to the play at hand) occuring after the shooter has the ball. The ruling mentions taking the FTs for the T and then the FTs for the second foul.

Would you take away a FT if the team called a timeout after the shooter had the ball?

Great find. I think this is as close as the case book will get for us and I can get behind that process. As to ending his free throw for a timeout: No, I would not punish him and take away his shot, but he was also not being a jackass in that play like he was in the other

[Adam]

Originally Posted by ARef

Great find. I think this is as close as the case book will get for us and I can get behind that process. As to ending his free throw for a timeout: No, I would not punish him and take away his shot, but he was also not being a jackass in that play like he was in the other

Maybe, but there's nothing in the jackass rule that would allow you to treat the play any differently than a timeout request.

[ARef]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Maybe, but there's nothing in the jackass rule that would allow you to treat the play any differently than a timeout request.

Agreed. And try as I might to not let that impact my judgment, I know it probably does a little bit.