Bottom Lane Slot not filled

[zebraman]

Stan,

Case 9.1.2 follows a time-out therefore the "resuming play procedure" is followed. When the resuming play procedure is in effect, a free throw violation is the correct call. However, the original post did not occur after a time-out (nor at the beginning of a quarter) so the resuming play procedure is not in effect. When no resuming play procedure is in effect, the defense must occupy the bottom spots.

Z

[Stan]

Originally posted by zebraman
Stan,

Case 9.1.2 follows a time-out therefore the "resuming play procedure" is followed. When the resuming play procedure is in effect, a free throw violation is the correct call. However, the original post did not occur after a time-out (nor at the beginning of a quarter) so the resuming play procedure is not in effect. When no resuming play procedure is in effect, the defense must occupy the bottom spots.

Z

Thanks Z, Stan

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
Thanks Bob - I had the exact same thought. The first FT violation provision applies only to resuming play, not to this sitch. As for MTD, I think you missed it here. This is a cluless coach who does not know that his team does not have the lower lane spaces filled, or does not know his team needs to fill both lower lane spaces. It is usually considered something you deserve to be able to fill, and some coaches pay no attention to the fact you are required to fill them.

Clueless coach or not. When the Trail tells the coach to get a player in the first spot and the coach ignores the Trail, that coach is "asking" for a delay of game technical. The first lane spaces are not to quote you: "usually considered something you deserve to be able to fill." By rule the defensive team must occupy them.

[Hawks Coach]

MTD
Please don't misuse my words in that manner. What I was referring to is not the rule and ruling, but the mindset of a coach. The rule is quite clear. However, coaches do not generally read rulebooks. And coaches do not think of the rule as a requirement to occupy the lower space, but rather as the right to occupy that space because of the advantageous position it presents. A coach is usually more concerned that the other team will sneak into a space that his team has the right to occupy, as opposed to worrying about his team not occupying a space it is required to occupy.

Your orignal post made it sound like the coach is attempting to delay intentionally and buy time. I was only contesting your conclusion regarding the intent of the coach. You were giving them more credit for rules knowledge (and blame for rules abuse) than they deserve.

I think that the general consensus is right - get their attention, inform them of the problem, if they don't fix it, go to the T. Manage the game, please, before whacking a team/coach.