what's wrong with this case ruling
 

NFHS 2.10.1 SITUATION E:

A1 has been given the ball for a throw-in after which A2 commits a foul against B2. B1 is awarded the ball for a throw-in and commits a throw-in violation by touching a foot inbounds before releasing the throw-in pass. The ball is at A1'S disposal for the subsequent throw-in when the officials are informed that A2's foul was team A's seventh foul. RULING: The clock had not started and the error is discovered within the correctable error time frame. B2 is awarded the bonus with no players along the lane lines. The point of interruption is the throw-in for team A (2-10-1aq, 2-20-6).

<strike>Nothing I can see.</strike>

Never mind.

Is This It?
 

"The ball is at A1'S disposal" has a capital S -- should be small case: "A1's".

Edit: Unless you're talking about the fact that it sounds like last year's ruling before the new "team control during throw-in" revision -- yet another instance of the casebook needing to play catch up with the new rule.

isn't A2's foul a team foul? thus no free throws.

Email to Henry Zaborniak, Jr., NFHS Basketball Rules Committee Chairman
 

On Nov. 16/Wed.(01:34pmEST), 2011, I sent the following email to Hank:


H. Zaborniak/OhioHSAA: Incorrect Ruling in the 2011-12 NFHS Basketball Casebook.‏


From: Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. ([email protected])

Sent: Wed 11/16/11 1:34 PM

To: Henry Zaborniak, Jr. ([email protected])

Bcc: Daryl H. Long ([email protected])


Nov. 16/Wed.(01:34pmEST), 2011


Hank:

I was reading the Casebook this morning and came across an error in the Casebook. The error is in the Ruling for Play 2.10.1 SITUATION E.

The Play reads: "A1 has been given the ball for a throw-in when A2 commits a foul against B2. B1 is awarded the ball for a throw-in and commits a throw-in violation by touching a foot inbounds before releasing the throw-in pass. The ball is at A1's disposal for the subsequent throw-in when the officials are informed that A2's foul was Team A's seventh team foul."

The RULING reads: "The clock had not started and the error is discovered within the correctable error timeframe. B2 is awarded the bonus with no players along the lane lines. The point of interruption is the throw-in for Team A. (R2-S10-A1a; R2-S1-A6)"

SITUATION 2.10.1 E is no longer a Correctable Error because of the change in the definition of Team Control. The Common Foul by A2 was a Team Control Foul and the penalty for a TCF is a throw-in nearest the spot of the foul which is what happened. B1's throw-in violation occured during the throw-in which was the penalty for A2's CF against B2.

Mark DeNucci, Sr.


I am still awaiting a response from Hank.

MTD, Sr.

got it -- team control foul. NFHS has some fixin' to do.

Doh. I was focussed on the correctable aspect (the point of the case play). They could easily change this to get the point across by making the initial play a defensive foul.

Me too when another official first brought this to my attention. A lesson learned from this for me is to confirm with at least one partner on odd situations such as correctable errors.

Didn't you post this here already? Someone did, back near the start of the season.

edit: I see that was already covered. My mistake.

How many were swearing,1-2-3? "I heard focussed"

:eek:

That was pretty funny.

Shut up

You know you laughed.

Not out loud.

I'm missing the joke. :o