The Official Forum
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Yet another "Why I Hate Test Questions" post... (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/93018-yet-another-why-i-hate-test-questions-post.html)

bowlingref Fri Nov 30, 2012 01:04am
How long has it been since the lane was 6 ft. wide? I graduated high 1970 and the was not not 6 ft. wide then. Maybe durign Fred & Barneys playing days the lane was made from Flinstone.

Camron Rust Fri Nov 30, 2012 01:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 864182)
It could be under the present set-up of the game, but remember that this could go back to when the lane was only six feet wide. Under that court situation, a player along the lane did not have to violate in order to GT a FT.
I think it would be pretty difficult, even with a 6 ft. lane, to keep your feet outside the plane of the FT lane boundary and be able to reach the ball in the middle of the lane except for perhaps just as it left the shooters hands.

PSidbury Fri Nov 30, 2012 09:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by APG (Post 864179)
To answer your question: Are free throws ever shot as a result of a double foul?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PSidbury (Post 864177)
Double any foul is POI...

And that's where I stopped thinking about it, checked "false" and moved on.
:cool:

MD Longhorn Fri Nov 30, 2012 09:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 864184)
I think it would be pretty difficult, even with a 6 ft. lane, to keep your feet outside the plane of the FT lane boundary and be able to reach the ball in the middle of the lane except for perhaps just as it left the shooters hands.
What if Rick Barry was shooting the free throws...

jritchie Fri Nov 30, 2012 09:53am
[QUOTE=Nevadaref;864181]It seems that you have some kind of refresher test made up of old questions.QUOTE] No, this was from this years test!! And it is false because of double foul rule goes to POI

PG_Ref Fri Nov 30, 2012 12:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSidbury (Post 864175)
And here's another one...

"The official should hand or bounce the ball to the thrower for a throw-in unless the throw-in is from outside an end line following a successful goal or awarded goal."
True or False.

False.

SECTION 6 THROW-IN ADMINISTRATION
ART. 1 . . . The official shall hand or bounce the ball to the thrower for a throwin unless the throw-in is from outside an end line following a successful goal.

That's it. No mention of "awarded goal", and since a technical foul shot can be an awarded goal, as well a foul shot to end a period when time has expired... it still has to be false.

Thank you and good luck !
To me the answer is true. The only time the official doesn't have to hand or bounce the ball to the thrower is after a made basket. If it's an awarded goal, it's after either BI or GT, in which case you blow the play dead and then administer a throw-in. A technical foul shot is not an awarded goal, it's a merited free throw based on the "T" ... or am I misunderstanding something?

APG Fri Nov 30, 2012 01:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by PG_Ref (Post 864251)
To me the answer is true. The only time the official doesn't have to hand or bounce the ball to the thrower is after a made basket. If it's an awarded goal, it's after either BI or GT, in which case you blow the play dead and then administer a throw-in. A technical foul shot is not an awarded goal, it's a merited free throw based on the "T" ... or am I misunderstanding something?
The answer is false. The questions asks if an official should hand or bounce the ball in all throw-in situations except in two:

After a successful field goal: This is true because we don't have to handle the ball

After an awarded field goal: This make the statement false because we have to handle the ball.

PG_Ref Fri Nov 30, 2012 01:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by APG (Post 864258)
After an awarded field goal: This make the statement false because we have to handle the ball.
LOL ... I just said that :o I did not read the OP carefully. Thanx for the enlightenment.

ref2coach Thu Dec 06, 2012 12:51am
One I would like my logic checked on:
If a player is directed to leave the game for excessive blood on the uniform the blood can be wiped off and the player may re-enter at the first opportunity.

3-3-4 says ....next opportunity to substitute after the clock has been properly started properly following his/her replacement.
3-3-7 says ....uniform...is appropriately cleaned.
I say the answer is false because "next opportunity" is not enough information and "wiped" is not "appropriately cleaned".
How is my logic?

just another ref Thu Dec 06, 2012 01:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ref2coach (Post 865254)
One I would like my logic checked on:
If a player is directed to leave the game for excessive blood on the uniform the blood can be wiped off and the player may re-enter at the first opportunity.

3-3-4 says ....next opportunity to substitute after the clock has been properly started properly following his/her replacement.
3-3-7 says ....uniform...is appropriately cleaned.
I say the answer is false because "next opportunity" is not enough information and "wiped" is not "appropriately cleaned".
How is my logic?
First opportunity sounds fine. If the blood is truly "wiped off", I would say that it is appropriately clean.

But I understand your concerns and I am not thrilled with the wording of the question, either.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:13pm.
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1