Free throw vioation questions

[Raymond]

The NFHS put in a rule a couple years ago in regards to how players' feet can be positioned in relation to the lane line, nobody ever enforced it.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

The NFHS put in a rule a couple years ago in regards to how players' feet can be positioned in relation to the lane line, nobody ever enforced it.

BNF:



Just what in the Sam Hill are you talking about? There is not such rule in the NFHS, NCAA Men's/Women's Rules as to how a player in one of the marked lane spaces can position their feet except that they have to be within the confines of the lane space and that NFHS and NCAA Men's/Women's Rules for over fifty (50) years and that goes back to the NBCUSC days. The FIBA Rules have been the same also because the NAGWS (women's college in 'The Ancient Day') Rules which were base upon FIBA Rules.

MTD, Sr.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

BNF:



Just what in the Sam Hill are you talking about? There is not such rule in the NFHS, NCAA Men's/Women's Rules as to how a player in one of the marked lane spaces can position their feet except that they have to be within the confines of the lane space and that NFHS and NCAA Men's/Women's Rules for over fifty (50) years and that goes back to the NBCUSC days. The FIBA Rules have been the same also because the NAGWS (women's college in 'The Ancient Day') Rules which were base upon FIBA Rules.

MTD, Sr.

Rule 9, Section 1

Art. 3...After the ball is placed at the disposal of a free thrower:

g. A player occupying a marked lane space may not have either foot beyond the vertical plane of the outside edge of any lane boundary, or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (2 inches by 36 inches) designated by a lane-space mark or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (12 inches by 36 inches) designated by a neutral zone. A player shall position one foot near the outer edge of the free-throw lane line. The other foot may be positioned anywhere within the designated 36-inch lane space.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Rule 9, Section 1

Art. 3...After the ball is placed at the disposal of a free thrower:

g. A player occupying a marked lane space may not have either foot beyond the vertical plane of the outside edge of any lane boundary, or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (2 inches by 36 inches) designated by a lane-space mark or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (12 inches by 36 inches) designated by a neutral zone. A player shall position one foot near the outer edge of the free-throw lane line. The other foot may be positioned anywhere within the designated 36-inch lane space.

APG:

To paraphrase President Clinton: Define "near"?

MTD, Sr.


P.S. I don't feel like climbing up into the attic to research this change but to be honest, this has to have been an unannounced grammatical change that I missed because the NCAA Men's/Women's Rules have no such wording. And if it is and unannounced grammatical change, it is one of the most stupid changes that the NFHS Rules Committee has made.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

APG:

To paraphrase President Clinton: Define "near"?

MTD, Sr.


P.S. I don't feel like climbing up into the attic to research this change but to be honest, this has to have been an unannounced grammatical change that I missed because the NCAA Men's/Women's Rules have no such wording. And if it is and unannounced grammatical change, it is one of the most stupid changes that the NFHS Rules Committee has made.

Whatever you feel like "near" is to you. No one I know enforces it.

I believe it was an editorial change from a couple of years back.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Whatever you feel like "near" is to you. No one I know enforces it.

I believe it was an editorial change from a couple of years back.

No, it was actually a deliberate rules change....maybe they called it an editorial but the commentary that went with it basically said that while the space is 3' deep, it was not the intent of the rules to allow a player to stand at the back of the space and duck behind another player. Not sure why. But they clearly said they want a foot nearer the lane line than the outer edge of the box. Never called it, however.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

No, it was actually a deliberate rules change....maybe they called it an editorial but the commentary that went with it basically said that while the space is 3' deep, it was not the intent of the rules to allow a player to stand at the back of the space and duck behind another player. Not sure why. But they clearly said they want a foot nearer the lane line than the outer edge of the box. Never called it, however.

Camron:

Do you remember what year the change was made. I am getting senile (according to my sons, LOL). And I still of the opinion that it is a stupid editorial change. Just call the lane violation if the player violates leaving his lane space before he is allowed to leave. I have. No matter where the player stands he still can leave early and go behind an opponent. Just call the violation (not you, I know you would).

MTD, Sr.

[davecasper]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Rule 9, Section 1

Art. 3...After the ball is placed at the disposal of a free thrower:

g. A player occupying a marked lane space may not have either foot beyond the vertical plane of the outside edge of any lane boundary, or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (2 inches by 36 inches) designated by a lane-space mark or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (12 inches by 36 inches) designated by a neutral zone. A player shall position one foot near the outer edge of the free-throw lane line. The other foot may be positioned anywhere within the designated 36-inch lane space.

Obviously I'm not an official and I'm not accustomed to reading rules like this, but I am not understanding this rule at all. "The verticle plane of the outside edge of any lane boundry"? Where would I find this verticle plane?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by davecasper

Obviously I'm not an official and I'm not accustomed to reading rules like this, but I am not understanding this rule at all. "The verticle plane of the outside edge of any lane boundry"? Where would I find this verticle plane?

Perpendicular to the playing surface.

MTD, Sr.

[tref]

Originally Posted by davecasper

Obviously I'm not an official and I'm not accustomed to reading rules like this, but I am not understanding this rule at all. "The verticle plane of the outside edge of any lane boundry"? Where would I find this verticle plane?

Where the outside edge & inside edge of any lane boundary meet.

The rationale for this is an attempt to remove rough play on FT rebounding.

[davecasper]

So as long as his back foot is within 3 feet from the lane he is ok then?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

BNF:



Just what in the Sam Hill are you talking about? There is not such rule in the NFHS, NCAA Men's/Women's Rules as to how a player in one of the marked lane spaces can position their feet except that they have to be within the confines of the lane space and that NFHS and NCAA Men's/Women's Rules for over fifty (50) years and that goes back to the NBCUSC days. The FIBA Rules have been the same also because the NAGWS (women's college in 'The Ancient Day') Rules which were base upon FIBA Rules.

MTD, Sr.

Are you part of the players' suit against the NFL?

Rules changes Posted

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I did not have to climb up into the attic to compare the 2008-09 Rules Book to the 2009-10 Rules Book, nor to read the NFHS (read: Mary Struckhoff, which means do NOT get me started, ) press release of May 11, 2009.

I would also like to thank APG, in his most recent post (Post #15) in this thread for providing a link to the May 2009 thread about the to NFHS R9-S1-A3g. If one reads the thread, I did address this nonsense back then in a post (Post #17), on May 07, 2009. I am getting forgetful, .

Comparing the rule from 2008-09 to 2009-10 the only change to NFHS R9-S1-A3g is in red:

2008-09: "A player occupying a marked lane space may not have either foot beyond the vertical plane of the outside edge of any lane boundary, or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (2 inches by 36 inches) designated by a lane-space mark or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (12 inches by 36 inches) designated by a neutral zone."

2009-10: "A player occupying a marked lane space may not have either foot beyond the vertical plane of the outside edge of any lane boundary, or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (2 inches by 36 inches) designated by a lane-space mark or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (12 inches by 36 inches) designated by a neutral zone. A player shall position one foot near the outer edge of the free-throw lane line. The other foot may be positioned anywhere within the designated 36-inch lane space."

The red sentences were not highlighted in gray in the 2009-10 Rules Book.

Mary Struchoff stated that the reason for the change was that "players attempting to leave their positions too early to gain a rebound advantage". If players are leaving early then the officials should be putting air in their whistles and enforce the violations. Do not add a stupid rule.

MTD, Sr.

[Adam]

Seems to me the player did not violate even the new rule, as he had one foot "near" the lane line.

[davecasper]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Seems to me the player did not violate even the new rule, as he had one foot "near" the lane line.

One foot was very near the lane line, but his back foot may have been more than 3' away from the lane line.