Yet another "Why I Hate Test Questions" post...

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Paul, what would a player have to do to goaltend a FT? He would have to intentionally violate by going into the lane and intentionally bat the ball before it reached the rim. So it's an intentional act and is therefore considered unsporting. That's why it's a technical foul.

Now, A1 shoots a FT and B1 legally enters the lane and makes a legal attempt to get the rebound. Unfortunately, he touches the ball while it's in the cylinder. Not an unsporting act, just something that can happen in a game.

That's why GT is a T and BI is not.

The answer is True.

All of that conjecture is nice, but it cannot be correct as until about 8 years ago both GT and BI during a free throw were technical fouls.
This is a test question for which it helps to be a veteran and recall that there was a rule change about this.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

All of that conjecture is nice, but it cannot be correct as until about 8 years ago both GT and BI during a free throw were technical fouls.
This is a test question for which it helps to be a veteran and recall that there was a rule change about this.

And BBR's 'conjecture' cannot be the reason they changed the rule?

[PSidbury]

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 !

[APG]

Maybe I'm missing something obvious in your explanation but when they speak about an awarded goal, I imagine basket interference or goaltend. In that instance, we are to handle the ball which would make that statement false.

[PSidbury]

Someone please explain this one to me... it boggles my mind.

"The free throws must be attempted by A1 and B1 if they foul each other simultaneously after the tossed ball leaves the referee's hand on a jump ball."
True or False?

Huh?
Are A1 and B1 the jumpers?
Double any foul is POI...

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

Good night and good luck !

[APG]

It doesn't matter if A1 and B1 are the jumpers, but yes, they're more than likely the jumpers in this play.

To answer your question: Are free throws ever shot as a result of a double foul?

[PSidbury]

Originally Posted by APG

To answer your question: Are free throws ever shot as a result of a double foul?

Originally Posted by PSidbury

Double any foul is POI...

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

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by PSidbury

Someone please explain this one to me... it boggles my mind.

"The free throws must be attempted by A1 and B1 if they foul each other simultaneously after the tossed ball leaves the referee's hand on a jump ball."
True or False?

Huh?
Are A1 and B1 the jumpers?
Double any foul is POI...

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

Good night and good luck !

It seems that you have some kind of refresher test made up of old questions.
Obviously, under the current rules there are no free throws for a double foul. However, my guess is that by including the phrase "after the tossed ball leaves the referee's hand on a jump ball" the test writer wants the reader to recognize that these are personal fouls and thus any FTs must be attempted by the offended players. So I would answer true.
Poor question though as there won't be any FTs.

[jritchie]

[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]

Originally Posted by PSidbury

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]

Originally Posted by PG_Ref

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]

Originally Posted by APG

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

LOL ... I just said that I did not read the OP carefully. Thanx for the enlightenment.

[ref2coach]

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?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

And BBR's 'conjecture' cannot be the reason they changed the rule?

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.

[bowlingref]

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.