Correctable Error?

[just another ref]

It is difficult to say how you would correct an error if you cannot imagine making that error. I cannot imagine a varsity official who doesn't know this rule.

BUT,

you gotta do something.

What MTD says sounds very reasonable when he says it. But, my first thought was if the free throws are announced as "one" followed by "two" the first is certainly the one which was not merited. Bottom line is that I'm the ref and what I say goes so either is correct.

The night I saw this happen, I was a bit surprised that the coach on the short end didn't know better. Considerable time has passed, and now I find it less surprising what a coach doesn't know.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

It is difficult to say how you would correct an error if you cannot imagine making that error. I cannot imagine a varsity official who doesn't know this rule.

BUT,

you gotta do something.

What MTD says sounds very reasonable when he says it. But, my first thought was if the free throws are announced as "one" followed by "two" the first is certainly the one which was not merited. Bottom line is that I'm the ref and what I say goes so either is correct.

The night I saw this happen, I was a bit surprised that the coach on the short end didn't know better. Considerable time has passed, and now I find it less surprising what a coach doesn't know.

And when he gets such a call in his favor, he'll insist on three free throws, yelling about "the officials last week."

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by just another ref

It is difficult to say how you would correct an error if you cannot imagine making that error. I cannot imagine a varsity official who doesn't know this rule.

BUT,

you gotta do something.

What MTD says sounds very reasonable when he says it. But, my first thought was if the free throws are announced as "one" followed by "two" the first is certainly the one which was not merited. Bottom line is that I'm the ref and what I say goes so either is correct.

The night I saw this happen, I was a bit surprised that the coach on the short end didn't know better. Considerable time has passed, and now I find it less surprising what a coach doesn't know.

Just Another Ref:

No where in the rules will you find anything about how the free throws awarded are grouped other than the definition of bonus free throws. The long and short of it is that three free throws were awarded when only two should have been awarded. If the third free throw was successful, cancel it.

Of course arguing with a possum may be easier than arguing with me, .

MTD, Sr.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Just Another Ref:

No where in the rules will you find anything about how the free throws awarded are grouped other than the definition of bonus free throws. The long and short of it is that three free throws were awarded when only two should have been awarded. If the third free throw was successful, cancel it.

Of course arguing with a possum may be easier than arguing with me, .

MTD, Sr.

What if the call had been a common foul followed by a T?

Official designates these free throws accordingly, same shooter takes all 4, makes the first 2, misses the next 2, then it is discovered that the team was not in the bonus. Which 2 do you wipe out?

[just another ref]

And another thing:

Had there been 2 separate fouls committed against the shooter in this play, if the intentional shots were first, the last would have been shot with players in the lane spaces.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by just another ref

What if the call had been a common foul followed by a T?

Official designates these free throws accordingly, same shooter takes all 4, makes the first 2, misses the next 2, then it is discovered that the team was not in the bonus. Which 2 do you wipe out?

That is a no brainer: The last two free throws. The player was only entitled to two free throws. The error was awarding him the third and fourth free throws.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. Just Another Ref, let us tweak the situation your proposed where the player fouled, A1, shoots the free throws awarded for the PF and makes both of them, then A2 shoots, and makes, the free throws for the TF. A1's free throws are the unmerited free three throws and are nullified.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

That is a no brainer: The last two free throws. The player was only entitled to two free throws. The error was awarding him the third and fourth free throws.

MTD, Sr.

This particular player in this case was entitled to no free throws at all. Yet the first two in this situation were so designated.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

That is a no brainer: The last two free throws. The player was only entitled to two free throws. The error was awarding him the third and fourth free throws.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. Just Another Ref, let us tweak the situation your proposed where the player fouled, A1, shoots the free throws awarded for the PF and makes both of them, then A2 shoots, and makes, the free throws for the TF. A1's free throws are the unmerited free three throws and are nullified.

The free throws which were specifically awarded for the PF were unmerited. A different shooter for the shots on the T doesn't change this.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

That is a no brainer: The last two free throws. The player was only entitled to two free throws. The error was awarding him the third and fourth free throws.

MTD, Sr.

I disagree. There are two different fouls here and that makes the difference. At any given time, you are shooting the penalties for a specific foul. I'm canceling the 1st two as those FTs were not merited because they were for the PF.

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

P.S. Just Another Ref, let us tweak the situation your proposed where the player fouled, A1, shoots the free throws awarded for the PF and makes both of them, then A2 shoots, and makes, the free throws for the TF. A1's free throws are the unmerited free three throws and are nullified.

This PS really gets to the heart of it. A1 was shooting the PF because A1 was required to shoot them. The T might have been shot any player but A1 was chosen....but it could have easily been A2. If it had been A2, it is obvious that the first FTs should be canceled. since those were the ones taken for the PF. Why would it be any different if A1 happened to selected for the FTs for the T?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

That is a no brainer: The last two free throws. The player was only entitled to two free throws. The error was awarding him the third and fourth free throws.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. Just Another Ref, let us tweak the situation your proposed where the player fouled, A1, shoots the free throws awarded for the PF and makes both of them, then A2 shoots, and makes, the free throws for the TF. A1's free throws are the unmerited free three throws and are nullified.

My post above was made at 09:35pmEST, which was 35 minutes past my bedtime. That is my story (and excuse) and I am sticking with it. That said, I have since read the posts after it and thought about it and I think it was Camron that correctly broke this play down into two separate fouls and that unlike this thread's OP we cannot combine the two penalties in this particular play. That means we have to look at the penalties separately, and apply the Correctable Error Rule appropriately.

MTD, Sr.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

My post above was made at 09:35pmEST, which was 35 minutes past my bedtime. That is my story (and excuse) and I am sticking with it. That said, I have since read the posts after it and thought about it and I think it was Camron that correctly broke this play down into two separate fouls and that unlike this thread's OP we cannot combine the two penalties in this particular play. That means we have to look at the penalties separately, and apply the Correctable Error Rule appropriately.

MTD, Sr.

It seems that the crew in the OP broke their play down into two separate penalties as well.

Originally Posted by OKREF

Crew gets together and shoots 3 free throws. 1 for the and 1 and 2 for the intentional foul.

Therefore I believe that the same principle applies.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by just another ref

It seems that the crew in the OP broke their play down into two separate penalties as well.




Therefore I believe that the same principle applies.

In the OP the game officials imposed two penalties for only one infraction for the rules. In the play discussed later in the thread there were two separate infractions for which each one has its one penalty. Can't use same logic.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. I may have to deduct 1,000 points from you but I will let you keep the both fine Cuban cigars, .