B-1 fouls A-1 while A-2 is in the act of shooting. A-2 continues to shoot and scores. Doesn't the shot?

Count it. Think of the new defensive strategies that would be in place if you didn't! A player on the other team has an open 3 to win the game--just foul another player to stop the shot. If a player is already in the act of shooting, they get the bucket if it goes in.

The shot counts. Continuous motion applies in this case.

(If A2 was going in for the game winner, B1's foul on A1 at the other end of the court would not affect the try.)

One thing to keep in mind, if A-1 fouls B-1 while A-2 is shooting, but hasn't released the shot, the basket doesn't count. This is according to NFHS rules.

"Keep 'em straight up!"

I agree with this 100%. At our rules meeting last night the state director was adamant that the shot does NOT count if the shooter had not released the ball before his teammate was fouled. Continuous motion does not apply unless the shooter is the player fouled.

That's straight out of the rule book,MJ.See R4-11-3.Easy call.

MJ, maybe I'm reading this incorrectly, and if so, I apologize. But I think you and BigJoe are talking about opposite scenarios. BigJoe is talking about a situation in which A1 is shooting and A1's teammate fouls an opponent. In this case continuous motion does not apply, and if A1 has not released the shot, then the shot can not count. This is b/c continuous motion is only applied when the defense commits a foul. If a member of the offensive team commits a foul the ball is dead immediately.

You, however, seem to be talking about a case where A1 is shooting and an opponent fouls A1's teammate. In this case continuous motion does apply and the shot by A1 would count. If your state director said the shot would not count, then I believe he is wrong.

Continuous motion applies anytime the defense commits a foul during a try for goal. It doesn't matter if the foul is committed against the shooter or a teammate of the shooter. It also doesn't matter if the foul is personal or technical in nature.

Chuck

Uh, ....
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ChuckElias

Quote:

You, however, seem to be talking about a case where A1 is shooting and an opponent fouls A1's teammate. Chuck

I know what you thought you meant to say. ;)

Re: Uh, ....
 

Uh-oh. I just re-read it, and it still makes sense to me. What's wrong with it?!?! Am I that tired?

Chuck

Schmidt MJ,
Don't take what you understood your state director to say to the bank.
He's wrong.
In every state. :rolleyes:
mick

Re: Re: Uh, ....
 

"You, however, seem to be talking about a case where A1 is shooting and an opponent fouls A1's teammate.

In this case continuous motion does apply and the shot by A1 would count. If your state director said the shot would not count, then I believe he is wrong." - Chuck

...[a couple of spaces.....]
Okay, that works. :)

Ok, I am totally enshrouded in an antihistamine-induced fog, b/c I have no idea if you're saying I screwed it up, or if you're agreeing with me, or if you're saying you just read it wrong, or if you're correcting what I wrote to make it "work".

What the &*%^$#* am I missing?!?!

Chuck

Rest easy,Mr. Elias!As usual,your analysis of the play is cogent,pithy and correct.

Our hopes and prayers are also with you in your present moment of physical distress!Get well soon!

Good idea, JR. I'm off to take a nap. I can't focus mentally right now.

Chuck

Of Course, I agree with you.

You wrote: <i>"You, however, seem to be talking <b>about a case</b> where A1 is shooting and an opponent fouls A1's teammate. <b>In this case</b> continuous motion does apply and the shot by A1 would count. If your state director said the shot would not count, then I believe he is wrong."</i>

After reading the words, again, and then again, I now see that you were not changing "cases", but rather continuing on and correcting the case of SchmidtMJ.

ShmidtMJ changed horses based upon BigJoe's post, and I thought you had gotten back on the original case rather than correctly correcting ShmidtMJ.

...And I cannot even blame my thought process on Antihistamines. ...That's just me. :rolleyes:

Good luck with that cold thing. ;)

mick