I completely understand that there are times that someone goes up to shoot and instead decides to pass. And if they do that of their own volition... fine.

But when someone goes up with what appears to me (and/or my partners) to be a shot, and is then fouled in a way that takes that option away from him, it is completely unfair and inappropriate to penalize the fouled player for trying to salvage the play - especially considering that he doesn't know for a fact if we're going to call the foul or not. All he knows is he suddenly can't shoot and has to do something to avoid a violation - so he passes.

Wanting to hold that against the player is wrong. Insisting that the player guess whether we're going to call the foul or not is wrong. The seeming desire to punish the offended here is beyond wrong.

Well, that's different then.:D

Have you never seen a player drive to the basket and go through a normal shooting motion only to dish it off at the last second? You thought he would shoot, didn't you? But he didn't. So how can you say there is no basis for it?

This example from the first page of the thread:

Exactly what I'm saying.

It's really never been much of a debate where I've worked or for the different supervisors for whom I've worked.

I've actually been complimented a couple times by observers for bringing my partners this information. And I've seen officials get criticized for not knowing that the player passed the balled off when they were awarded 2 shots.

And back to what started the thread, it was about a partner bringing information. I'm going to continue to bring that information. If my partner decides to stay with a shooting foul that's his perogative. It will not be something I bring up in the locker room afterward b/c it will be obvious by his decsion what his judgment is.

I'm saying there is no basis for not giving a player two shots solely because he passed the ball rather than continue with his original motion which may now be impossible because of contact.

Who said it was impossible? What example was given where it was impossible to get the shot off?

There are a million examples. The reason may not even have to do with the defender who committed the foul.

A1 goes up to shoot and is grabbed by B1. < Whistle> Just prior to the release, B2 steps out to contest the shot. Because of the contact, A1 realizes he will not get the shot over B2, so he dishes off instead.

Ruling: 2 shots

I did.

What about this. Last second shot, player rises to shoot, fouled hard enough to not be able to shoot. Whistle. Ball never leaves his hand. Someone said earlier that to get two shots the ball needs to leave the hands.

The rule itself tells us this is not the case.

Who said that? I have been following this conversation pretty closely and I have yet to remember reading someone saying what you just suggested. It should not be hard to quote if someone actually made that claim.

Peace

You would need to show me that post because that's not something I've ever heard as an official.

In fact I'm one of those officials who hates when I have partners who rule fouls "on the floor" when A1 clearly ended their dribble and started their habitual shooting motion. That failure to award 2 shots is FAR more prevalent then what is being talked about in this thread.

But this isn't the NBA...there's no continuation! ;)

This whole thing is becoming much more complicated then it needs to be. I think if you judged the player to be shooting the ball when they were fouled the rule book supports you sending the player to the line. If you are not sure what they were doing in the air/ on the ground with the ball when they were fouled you make the best judgement you can based on whatever information you can before, during and even after the whistle.

Here's the hard sell for me on giving player two shots:

Player jumps up to shoot and is fouled by primary defender while shooting. Gets two shots.

Player jumps up to shoot and is not fouled by primary defender while shooting. Gets his shot off. No call.

Player jumps up to shoot and is not fouled by primary defender, see's secondary shot blocker and passes the ball. Play on no call.

Player jump up to shoot and is fouled by primary defender, see's the secondary shot blocker and passes the ball. Foul called. Two shots?!?

I don't think this can be automatic and must depend on when the foul was called and what the officials see/judge. Can't always be a shooting foul, can't always be a non-shooting foul. More information here to try to make the right call can't hurt but thats why its a judgement call.

You did. Shoot the ball means leaving the hands to me.