Need a caseplay

[tref]

A1 releases the front end of a one & one. A5 shoves B5 under the basket, L calls a foul & the FT is successful.
I thought we should shoot the bonus FT with the lane clear & B inbounds after the try...
the calling official says no, wipes the FT & gives the ball to B. This seems incorrect to me.

Is there a similar caseplay out there?? Thanks.

[APG]

Your interpretation is correct...A would shoot the remaining free throw and B would either have a spot throw-in closest to where the foul occurred if the last free throw is missed or an undesignated throw-in along the endline if the 2nd free throw is made. That is assuming that A wasn't in the penalty.

[Adam]

rule set? He may have considered it a FT violation on A5 for leaving the spot early. Not saying it was right, but it's the only justification I can think of; assuming he felt A5 left the spot after he fouled B5.

[Rob1968]

Agreeing with Snaqs, Case Book Rule 9, Comment, (c). And Case Book 8.7, although it deals with a double personal foul, the Ruling indicates that the shot is not cancelled.
Perhaps the official in the OP was confusing the consequence of a violation by a member of the shooting team with that of a foul by the shooting team.

[tref]

HS rules, the ball hit & then the shove. But I found what I was looking for in 7.5.7 Situation F.

For the record, the calling official said the foul by the shooting team member after the ball hit the rim was a violation.

I was working 3 person with my mentee & wanted to make sure he understands moving forward.

Thanks all!

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by tref

I was working 3 person with my mentee & wanted to make sure he understands moving forward.

If he's the "men-tee", then are you the "men-tal"?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by tref

The calling official said the foul by the shooting team member after the ball hit the rim was a violation.

You have got to be kidding me?

[APG]

Originally Posted by tref

For the record, the calling official said the foul by the shooting team member after the ball hit the rim was a violation.

I've heard all kinds of myths and rule misinterpretations...this is the first time I've heard someone bring this up.

[tref]

Unfortunately, no I'm not.
But I took the hit because I knew the rule & didn't insist on doing it right.
The positive part of this is that we all own that particular rule now!

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by tref

Unfortunately, no I'm not.
But I took the hit because I knew the rule & didn't insist on doing it right.
The positive part of this is that we all own that particular rule now!

I have a supervisor who would have ripped you a new one for allowing your partner to kick a rule, especially if you are a more veteran official.

[tref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I have a supervisor who would have ripped you a new one for allowing your partner to kick a rule, especially if you are a more veteran official.

Same here... for the record, I did provide the info & realized that he wasn't going to give in. No need to cause a big delay in a National Tournament! Fortunately for the crew it was an off season contest & the IC did not affect the outcome of the game.

The calling official was the veteran on the crew.

I thought the situation provided me with an opportunity to share with my mentee:
1. How to provide information to a partner.
2. How to know who you're dealing with and either defer to the vet (if its not a gamer) or use the phrase that pays if necessary.
3. How to follow up the next day with a non confrontational email with a rules support.