Free Throw Violation

[Nate1224hoops]

I am a VGirls coach and I have been scouting our local district rival. They have a young lady that is really athletic and good. However, she shoots a jump shot from the free throw line.

Not sure why, but she is really distract by her feet. Right before she releases she looks down at her feet. In the games I have seen her she shoots about 78%, not bad for high school girls.

Here's the catch. Every time....I mean every time she releases she comes down on the FT line. So while at a game last night, one of our local officials who has been officiating for 20+ years, comes by to say hello. I explain to him what I have just explained to you. His relpy was, "hmm, I've never seen that before. I'll have to check." This was kind of disappointing because we have lots of young officials and I assume that if this really good official doesn't know then most of our younger guys wont either. He said he wasn't sure if on the line and over the line were different.

This got me wondering if maybe I don't know the rule. I believe this to be a FT line violation, therefore taking away any made FT and awarding a 2nd shot in a two shot foul or the opposing team the ball on the baseline for a throw in. Is this correct?

[bob jenkins]

By rule, a violation.

The "intent and purpose" of the rule is to prevent the FT shooter from getting an unfair advantage for a rebound. Landing on the line doesn't give that advantage.

So, it won't often be called.

still, the young lady should be coached to stay behind the line.

[tref]

Does she land on or over the FT line?
Does the ball contact the rim or backboard prior to her landing?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by tref

Does she land on or over the FT line?
Does the ball contact the rim or backboard prior to her landing?

By rule, neither matters.

[tref]

I thought all players could cross their plane after the ball hits?

[Nate1224hoops]

Originally Posted by tref

Does she land on or over the FT line?
Does the ball contact the rim or backboard prior to her landing?

She is lands on the line every time she shoots. Just guessing on my part but I assume the FT is about 2 inches thick. It's not like she jumps clear across the line. She comes down on the line with her right foot before the ball makes any contact.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by tref

I thought all players could cross their plane after the ball hits?

That's correct. But the plane is crossed (your current post) before the player lands (the prior post).

(again, all "by rule" and not how it's necessarily called)

[tref]

Got it!

Yeah it would be tough to make this call consistently on the same kid every time she shot it.
But you could always be preventative & ask her to Nick Van Exel it

[Nate1224hoops]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

By rule, a violation.

The "intent and purpose" of the rule is to prevent the FT shooter from getting an unfair advantage for a rebound. Landing on the line doesn't give that advantage.

So, it won't often be called.

still, the young lady should be coached to stay behind the line.

Bob,

Thats exactly what I thought.

Now my next question. Are you going to call it? Why or why not?

What I really want to know is if this is something that you would consider another coach "whinning/crying" about. Or if pointed out to you, you would call.

I understand the purpose of the rule is to keep players from trying to miss purposely and quickly gain an advantage for the rebound. But whose to say she isn't going to have a better opportunity to claim the rebound if she is already on the line. I mean if you don't call her for it, the ball hits the rim and she is attacking the short shot then what?

Is this a gray area like the hand check? Is pointed out by an opposing coach is this something you say "she isn't getting an advantage so I'm not going to call that." If so would you permitt my FT shooter to start with her foot on the line with no jump?

Just playing devils advocate trying to find out if this is something that she be brought up later! Thanks for the response guys!!

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

By rule, a violation.

The "intent and purpose" of the rule is to prevent the FT shooter from getting an unfair advantage for a rebound. Landing on the line doesn't give that advantage.

So, it won't often be called.

It won't often be called, but should it? It's a clear rules violation.

I just wonder sometimes why we treat some violations as more "sacred" than others. Like stepping over the endline on a throw in. That's going to get called more often, I would think, than barely stepping over the free throw line.

I've heard several times that we should use our judgement on fouls, but violations should be black and white, as written in the rule book. Do I agree with that? I don't know. But it makes sense.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by fiasco

It won't often be called, but should it? It's a clear rules violation.

I just wonder sometimes why we treat some violations as more "sacred" than others. Like stepping over the endline on a throw in. That's going to get called more often, I would think, than barely stepping over the free throw line.

I've heard several times that we should use our judgement on fouls, but violations should be black and white, as written in the rule book. Do I agree with that? I don't know. But it makes sense.

As a general statement, violations are written in the form "act ==> penalty." Fouls are written "Act + advantage ==> penalty". It's the "advantage" part that requires judgment, and that makes violations more black-and-white.

That said, I'm going to be looking more closely in certain situations. So, for your example of stepping over the end line -- if there's pressure, I'll be looking for it, and call it. If there's no pressure, I'll be looking for the next competitive match-up and likely miss (and thus not call) a "small" violation.

Since a FT is, by definition, "no pressure" (at least physically, by the defense), I'm not going to be focussing on the shooter's foot, to the nearest 2" -- I'm going to be getting ready for the rebounding action. IF I know about it, I'll try to talk to the player before the FT, and maybe even mention something to her coach before I call it.

And, frankly, I've never seen anyone at the V level do this consistently, so much of the (or my) discussion it theoretical.

[Nate1224hoops]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

As a general statement, violations are written in the form "act ==> penalty." Fouls are written "Act + advantage ==> penalty". It's the "advantage" part that requires judgment, and that makes violations more black-and-white.

That said, I'm going to be looking more closely in certain situations. So, for your example of stepping over the end line -- if there's pressure, I'll be looking for it, and call it. If there's no pressure, I'll be looking for the next competitive match-up and likely miss (and thus not call) a "small" violation.

Since a FT is, by definition, "no pressure" (at least physically, by the defense), I'm not going to be focussing on the shooter's foot, to the nearest 2" -- I'm going to be getting ready for the rebounding action. IF I know about it, I'll try to talk to the player before the FT, and maybe even mention something to her coach before I call it.

And, frankly, I've never seen anyone at the V level do this consistently, so much of the (or my) discussion it theoretical.

Bob,

Thanks for your reply.

So if I understand you correctly, in a crucial situation (say game tied 60-60 with 10 seconds on the clock) the opposing coach says, "will you watch her right foot. It lands on the line everytime." You are going to do:

A) Ignore the clear violation
B) Go tell her to watch her feet
C) Call the violation, if it occurs

Again, is it an advantage? To me, it obviously is for this particular shooter. As I posted earlier, are you going to let every other shooter in the game line up with their toes on the line.

It is the craziest thing ever. This is a 6 foot post player who is a state champion high jumper. She shouldn't have to jump....but she does!!

[Raymond]

First time I see it I'm going quietly walk up and say "you need to stay behind the line until it hits", after that I feel obligated to call it.

I believe if you call it once then the problem will take care of itself. (for that game and all your partners who have subsequent games)

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Nate1224hoops

Bob,

Thanks for your reply.

So if I understand you correctly, in a crucial situation (say game tied 60-60 with 10 seconds on the clock) the opposing coach says, "will you watch her right foot. It lands on the line everytime." You are going to do:

A) Ignore the clear violation
B) Go tell her to watch her feet
C) Call the violation, if it occurs

Again, is it an advantage? To me, it obviously is for this particular shooter. As I posted earlier, are you going to let every other shooter in the game line up with their toes on the line.

It is the craziest thing ever. This is a 6 foot post player who is a state champion high jumper. She shouldn't have to jump....but she does!!

1) If you're talking to me, I'll be the Trail. This is the center's call.

2) I hope that we as a crew have seen and addressed this earlier.

3) It might be a FT advantage, but I don't see it (as I'm envisioning the play) as a rebounding advantage.

4) "Coach, I'll look for everyone entering early, but I also need to focus on the rebounding action."

5) If I see anyone "starting" on the line, I won't administer the FT until they are behind it. That's a different play from what we are discussing.

[just another ref]

In my area, a violation like this on the shooter is one that is consistently called. Violations on the players in the lane spaces entering early, not so much.