Communication with partner

[bob jenkins]

2000-2001 Interps Supplement:

SITUATION 3: A1 is in the act of shooting and is fouled by B1. The contact by B1 throws A1 off balance and in an effort to make a play A1 passes off to teammate A2 instead of proceeding through with an off-balance shot. The official rules that the pass-off by A1 is not a factor as it was not the original intent and only the result of the contact by B1. RULING: A1 is awarded two free throws for the foul committed by B1. COMMENT: Provided the official deems that A1 was in the act of shooting when fouled (the player had begun the motion which habitually precedes the release of the ball for a try), the subsequent pass-off is ignored. (4-40-3; 4-40-1; Summary of Penalties #5)

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

2000-2001 Interps Supplement:

SITUATION 3: A1 is in the act of shooting and is fouled by B1. The contact by B1 throws A1 off balance and in an effort to make a play A1 passes off to teammate A2 instead of proceeding through with an off-balance shot. The official rules that the pass-off by A1 is not a factor as it was not the original intent and only the result of the contact by B1. RULING: A1 is awarded two free throws for the foul committed by B1. COMMENT: Provided the official deems that A1 was in the act of shooting when fouled (the player had begun the motion which habitually precedes the release of the ball for a try), the subsequent pass-off is ignored. (4-40-3; 4-40-1; Summary of Penalties #5)

That is the key phrase. A player passes the ball, they are not getting shots from me. And it is great to know that over 10 years ago there was an interp, but that does not help anyone but on this site now. This better be in the current books or it is basically useless.

Peace

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

A player passes the ball, they are not getting shots from me.

I'm late to the party, but this is how we do things here as well. It's consistently done among the high school and college officials in this area. There is no grey area. If the player passes the ball, no shots.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

2000-2001 Interps Supplement:

SITUATION 3: A1 is in the act of shooting and is fouled by B1. The contact by B1 throws A1 off balance and in an effort to make a play A1 passes off to teammate A2 instead of proceeding through with an off-balance shot. The official rules that the pass-off by A1 is not a factor as it was not the original intent and only the result of the contact by B1. RULING: A1 is awarded two free throws for the foul committed by B1. COMMENT: Provided the official deems that A1 was in the act of shooting when fouled (the player had begun the motion which habitually precedes the release of the ball for a try), the subsequent pass-off is ignored. (4-40-3; 4-40-1; Summary of Penalties #5)

That pretty must settles it. This interp lays it out in black and white with no ambiguity. Anyone that thinks "shot" when the player goes up but calls no-shot after they change to a pass after the foul is just being a wuss and not wanting to make the right call.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

That pretty must settles it. This interp lays it out in black and white with no ambiguity. Anyone that thinks "shot" when the player goes up but calls no-shot after they change to a pass after the foul is just being a wuss and not wanting to make the right call.

I do not know anyone that makes a call other than a rookie or someone without much experience that makes a determination based the minute or second a foul is called? And the interpretation (old) also said if the official determines the player was shooting. Well I do not think they are shooting when they pass the ball. I have yet to see that play would even make me rethink that position on a play.

And save the "being a wuss" comments. I can tell you I award a lot of shots and get crap for them because people do not realize that the NBA rule and NCAA and NF rule on continuous motion are exactly the same. It is not about getting crap on one call when this issue usually brings a lot more crap when you award a shot or count the basket on a clearly continuous motion issue.

Peace

[MD Longhorn]

An interpretation is only "old" if it's been superceded, which this one has not.

Regarding only rookies making this call, I saw this called a shooting foul in the Univ of Texas game just last week. Coach complained a little, but it appeared to me to be easily the right call. Guy was going up for a shot, was fouled pretty hard from about a 135 degree angle, and as he was falling saw a teammate at the 3 pt arc, and sort of shoved it over there.

And this is certainly not the ONLY time I'd seen a shooting foul called when no shot managed to get out of the shooter's hands.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

An interpretation is only "old" if it's been superceded, which this one has not.

True, and it is unlikely to be superceded when it states what is obvious.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

True, and it is unlikely to be superceded when it states what is obvious.

If it is so obvious then why is not done universally your way?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

If it is so obvious then why is not done universally your way?

Because, in this case, what some people do is contrary to the written rule.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

If it is so obvious then why is not done universally your way?

Until this thread, I thought it WAS universally done the right way. I don't know anyone who uses post-foul actions to determine what kind of foul it was.

[APG]

NCAA and NBA...you're going to see that, more often then not, called a foul and judged to be no shot and on the pass off. Heck, NCAA even added a signal to indicate no shot due to a pass off.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by APG

NCAA and NBA...you're going to see that, more often then not, called a foul and judged to be no shot and on the pass off. Heck, NCAA even added a signal to indicate no shot due to a pass off.

You beat me to that statement.

Peace

[just another ref]

Yep, and NCAA and NBA have the little restricted area under the basket thingie, and those have nothing to do with this thread, either.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by APG

NCAA and NBA...you're going to see that, more often then not, called a foul and judged to be no shot and on the pass off. Heck, NCAA even added a signal to indicate no shot due to a pass off.

And a lot of those times, the offensive player has already started shifting to the pass because they see the contact coming, not after the contact, and that makes a difference.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

And a lot of those times, the offensive player has already started shifting to the pass because they see the contact coming, not after the contact, and that makes a difference.

Not in the games I watch...especially for an NBA game.