When "shall" means "must"??

[letemplay]

When "simply" means "shoulda". Agreed, that's what you would have wanted, but in case of a screw-up, like not getting those guys there or if the coach just wants to talk to one of the two guys he's wants in the spots, do you wait on him? Or, if you are the administering official and you bounce the ball to the shooter and then realize something doesn't look right...while the shots on the way and then missed, you're wracking your brain to remember what to do.

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by letemplay

When "simply" means "shoulda". Agreed, that's what you would have wanted, but in case of a screw-up, like not getting those guys there or if the coach just wants to talk to one of the two guys he's wants in the spots, do you wait on him? Or, if you are the administering official and you bounce the ball to the shooter and then realize something doesn't look right...while the shots on the way and then missed, you're wracking your brain to remember what to do.

If I'm administering the free throw, I always check to see if I have ten players, the first two spots are filled, and they are properly lined up.

There are 5 correctable errors... 4 involve free throws. Make sure you take your time.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by letemplay

When "simply" means "shoulda". Agreed, that's what you would have wanted, but in case of a screw-up, like not getting those guys there or if the coach just wants to talk to one of the two guys he's wants in the spots, do you wait on him?

Hell no, you don't wait on him.

Doesn't he have 4 other players that can occupy those two spots?????

You give a reasonable opportunity to get two players in the spot. If they continue to delay, you whistle the T.

Or, if you are the administering official and you bounce the ball to the shooter and then realize something doesn't look right...while the shots on the way and then missed, you're wracking your brain to remember what to do.

Well, then you've screwed up. I wouldn't call the T because the FT hasn't been delayed. But I probably would call a violaion if the FT is missed.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Hell no, you don't wait on him.

Doesn't he have 4 other players that can occupy those two spots?????

You give a reasonable opportunity to get two players in the spot. If they continue to delay, you whistle the T.



Well, then you've screwed up. I wouldn't call the T because the FT hasn't been delayed. But I probably would call a violaion if the FT is missed.

I agree, however I am going to get the coach and tell him we need 2 guys on the blocks. Just seems that this situation can be prevented, if we want it to.

[letemplay]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Hell no, you don't wait on him.

Doesn't he have 4 other players that can occupy those two spots?????

You give a reasonable opportunity to get two players in the spot. If they continue to delay, you whistle the T.



Well, then you've screwed up. I wouldn't call the T because the FT hasn't been delayed. But I probably would call a violaion if the FT is missed.

that's what I was looking for, could a violation be called even if ref "screwed up" and didnt be sure both spots were taken by opponents of the shooter?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by letemplay

When "simply" means "shoulda". Agreed, that's what you would have wanted, but in case of a screw-up, like not getting those guys there or if the coach just wants to talk to one of the two guys he's wants in the spots, do you wait on him? Or, if you are the administering official and you bounce the ball to the shooter and then realize something doesn't look right...while the shots on the way and then missed, you're wracking your brain to remember what to do.

Use good game management. "Coach, I need these two spots filled." "Coach, if I don't get two players here, it will be a T."

(It's never gone further than that.)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob Jenkins

"If I don't get two players here, it will be a T."

Even if it's not after an intermission, or a timeout? If it is not after a timeout, don't we just use the resumption of pay procedure, put the ball at the disposal of the free thrower, and then just let the chips fall where they may?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Even if it's not after an intermission, or a timeout? If it is not after a timeout, don't we just use the resumption of pay procedure, put the ball at the disposal of the free thrower, and then just let the chips fall where they may?

Not for this situation. There's no provision.

[PG_Ref]

Originally Posted by Adam

Not for this situation. There's no provision.

Different procedure if after a time out ...

10.1.5 SITUATION A:

A1 is fouled by B1 during an unsuccessful try and is awarded two free throws. Team B requests and is granted a charged 60-second time-out. Team B disregards the 15-second warning signal and the signal ending the time-out and is still huddling with their coach at the end of the charged time-out.

RULING: The official shall administer the first free throw using the resumption-of-play procedure and a violation occurs if it is missed. If two B players are not in the required position when the official is ready to put the ball in play for the substitute throw, a delay of game technical foul will be assessed. If the first attempt is good, the same procedure is used for the second. (9-1-2; 10-1-5b)

[Adam]

Agreed, but Billy wanted to use it without a timeout.

[PG_Ref]

Originally Posted by Adam

Agreed, but Billy wanted to use it without a timeout.

Ahhh ... I see. Then tell Billy to stop it.

[letemplay]

It seems 10.1.5c says the same, just no timeout is mentioned and neither is a violation.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Even if it's not after an intermission, or a timeout? If it is not after a timeout, don't we just use the resumption of pay procedure, put the ball at the disposal of the free thrower, and then just let the chips fall where they may?

After a TO (or intermission -- but I can't figure out how you'd have FTs with the lane filled after an intermission) -- use the resumption of play procedure if the lower spaces aren't filled.

Not after a TO -- lower spaces must be filled or it's a T.

(The same is true for the FT shooter.)

[letemplay]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

After a TO (or intermission -- but I can't figure out how you'd have FTs with the lane filled after an intermission) -- use the resumption of play procedure if the lower spaces aren't filled.

Not after a TO -- lower spaces must be filled or it's a T.

(The same is true for the FT shooter.)

In your second scenario (not after a TO) when would you assess the T? After the shooter is bounced the ball? After he/she takes the first shot? Is it also a violation, in so much that if he/she misses the first shot and THEN the T is called, that the first shot is re-taken, followed by the second, followed by the two shots for the T? Sounds like a healthly penalty for a ref screwup...realizing that we are not giving the T unless we've asked B players to get in the spots, or given a few seconds at least for them to get there.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by letemplay

Sounds like a healthly penalty for a ref screwup...realizing that we are not giving the T unless we've asked B players to get in the spots, or given a few seconds at least for them to get there.

Pretty sure that is not even remotely what he is indicating. If you ask the coach to get 2 players in those spots and he refuses or ignores the request, then the T. For me, this would only happen if I've exhausted all reasonable attempts to get the coach to comply.