Correct or incorrect. If incorrect is this correctable?

[rawhi1]

Situation:A1 is shooting the 2nd of two free thr.ows. As a1 receives the balls for the free throw the administering official sees b1s foot across the line separating the marked lane space nearest the free thrower. The official gives the delayed singal as a1 releases the ball. A1s 2nd attempt does not hit the rim and the official gives a1 another attempt at the 2nd free throw.A1 hits the 2nd free throw and play continues with throw in by team B Was the official correct.

[just another ref]

This is not correct. The failure of the shooter to hit the rim is also a violation. It should have been an AP situation.

No, this is not correctable, as apparently the free throw violation by the shooter was not recognized/called.

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by rawhi1

Situation:A1 is shooting the 2nd of two free thr.ows. As a1 receives the balls for the free throw the administering official sees b1s foot across the line separating the marked lane space nearest the free thrower. The official gives the delayed singal as a1 releases the ball. A1s 2nd attempt does not hit the rim and the official gives a1 another attempt at the 2nd free throw.A1 hits the 2nd free throw and play continues with throw in by team B Was the official correct.

In this case, if the airball was recognized as a violation, it is a double violation and would be followed by another FT if there is to be one or AP arrow. The penalty is the same as simultaneous violation because it was on the defense and the shooter.

[rawhi1]

Thanks for the info. Can someone please add a rulebook reference and case book situation play if one exist.

[dsqrddgd909]

Rule: 6.4.3.c


6.4.3 SITUATION A:

B1, in a marked lane space, enters the lane prematurely. The administering official properly signals the violation and A1 attempts the free throw. However, A1's attempt does not enter the basket or touch the ring.

RULING: The violations by B1 and A1 constitute a simultaneous free-throw violation. Unless another free throw follows, play resumes with an alternating-possession throw-in from a designated spot outside the end line.

[Nevadaref]

I'm not convinced that this is the same as missing a travel.

If the officials saw the ball fail to contact the ring, but incorrectly thought that only the first violation should be penalized, then a rule has been set aside with the result being the awarding of an unmerited FT.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I'm not convinced that this is the same as missing a travel.

If the officials saw the ball fail to contact the ring, but incorrectly thought that only the first violation should be penalized, then a rule has been set aside with the result being the awarding of an unmerited FT.

Interesting theory. (And as conspiracy theories go I like it, .) But it is worth exploring.

MTD, Sr.

[Tio]

This is the dreaded double-violation and the correct procedure is to go to the AP arrow.