Whoops...

[Adam]

Pending Nevada (or someone else) posting the rulings from the Fed:

First, I have a question, was the official awarding the first two free throws as bonus free throws? If so, it seems the first two were erroneous. If not, then the last one was erroneous.

Since B2 was not the fouled player, it's a pretty hard sell to consider the first two erroneous. That would make it a "wrong player incorrectly being awarded two unmerited free throws" or something similarly redundant. If he had instructed B1 to shoot those first two free throws, it would obviously be the first two shots that were to be cancelled. I'm inclined to go that route if that was the thinking for the administering official.

That said, since B obviously had their best (or chosen) shooter on the line for all 5, I'm equally comfortable with declaring the first four valid.

I'm honestly not sure there's a right answer here short of a very clear interpretation from NFHS (or your state).

Final question: Why was the R questioning the decision to toss the kid?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Adam

First, I have a question, was the official awarding the first two free throws as bonus free throws?

Asked and answered.

Originally Posted by RookieDude

.... U1 admitted he gave the 1st 2 FT's because he thought they were in the double bonus and forgot the AP was in play.

[RookieDude]

Originally Posted by Adam

Final question: Why was the R questioning the decision to toss the kid?

Computer is messed up...short answer (before it screws up again)...R did not like the fact that U1 didn't whistle and show a T...R thought it would look bad to eject and thought one Twould be sufficient.