Deliberate lane violations on free throw?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

If the committee ever comes out with a comment, case play, or rule change specifically mentioning not being able to violate multiple times, then I can live with that.

I thought they had, but I'm not going back through the archives to find out.

Informal discussion / warning to the coach, then whack.

[billyu2]

I think the M&M Guy has a very good point.

[Adam]

There is no rule requiring a team to make the FT.
There is a rule prohibiting the defensive team from entering the lane before the ball hits the rim or backboard.

When these two issues combine (repeated violations where the attempt is obviously to nullify an advantage earned by the other team), I'm siding with the team that's not actually breaking a rule.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Intentionally violating is one way to differentiate this situation from holding the ball while the other team plays a tight zone.

And where is that differentiation mentioned in 10-1-5?

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

There is no rule requiring a team to make the FT.
There is a rule prohibiting the defensive team from entering the lane before the ball hits the rim or backboard.

And what is the penalty for that?

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

When these two issues combine (repeated violations where the attempt is obviously to nullify an advantage earned by the other team), I'm siding with the team that's not actually breaking a rule.

That's fine, but where is your justification for "siding" with one team over another? You can use your exact same justification for calling a T on a team that's behind for continuing to foul at the end of a game to stop the clock, but we all know that has been addressed as an acceptable strategy. We call the violation(s) as they occur, and we don't get to add in another penalty just because we don't like the strategy, and it keeps us from getting to our dinner reservation on time... There is no rule that penalizes multiple violations differently than the penalty for the violation itself, other than the issues of where a delay warning can be issued, as mentioned in 10-1-5. And there is no delay warning available for committing multiple FT violations.

Realistically, how will this ever be a major issue? How many times can a FT shooter attempt to miss without accidentally making it, or missing the rim entirely? So, if they miss the rim, and they have the possession arrow, what happens then?

Again, I understand the points, but I still have not been shown where the OP's sitch is a T, other than expanding the definition of the word "actionless". (Unless, of course, someone comes up with a past interp. Then I'll shut up. )

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

And where is that differentiation mentioned in 10-1-5?

It's obviously not in 10-1-5. I think you make an excellent point, just wanted to demonstrate where one way of differentiating, if we go down that road, exists. "Spirit of the rules."

[RookieDude]

I don't know...

it seems when a player is just holding the ball against a "tight zone" the game is STILL MOVING, the clock is running.

When players violate, as in the OP, the game is NOT MOVING, the clock is stopped.

Does that explanation make you feel better M&M?...

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I thought they had, but I'm not going back through the archives to find out.

Informal discussion / warning to the coach, then whack.

I hope someone does come up with a past ruling, then I can calm down.

I'm only advocating making sure we know the difference between a distasteful strategy and something that is against the rules.