If you want to talk about the "act of shooting," it ends when the ball is in the air. You've referred to a bobble, which clearly involves the ball in the air. That would mark the end of the "first" act of shooting.

The "first" try ends when it is "certain the throw is unsuccessful." When the player regains control of the "bobbled" ball, it is certain that the "first" throw is unsuccessful. The ball is then dead due to the foul.

There is no "second" try or act of shooting, unless you count the one with a dead ball.

BTW, I fully accept BNR's view that at this level, the rule should be ignored. That does not mean that we all have misinterpreted the rule. :)

Rational Explanation ...
 

Good explanation. Previous to this post, I probably would have have counted the basket.

Questions: "NFHS 4-41: The act of shooting begins simultaneously with the start of the try or tap and ends when the ball is clearly in flight." Does the statement "clearly in flight" also refer to a bobble? Is a bobble "clearly" a ball in flight? What if, during a continuous motion situation, the ball handler, after getting fouled, and becoming an airborne shooter, switches the ball from one hand, to the other, with, at some point, the ball being airborne between the two hands?

This should not have counted at any level IMO.

Some interpreters see NFHS 4-41-1: "The act of shooting begins simultaneously with the start of the try or tap and ends when the ball is clearly in flight, and includes the airborne shooter," (italics added) when considered with 4-1-2 . . ."The airborne shooterr is considered to be in the act of shooting." to mean that even when the shooter's hand has momentarily lost contact with the ball, the act of shooting is continued until the shooter is no longer airborne.
It's a simplistic view, used to validate the reasoning that on such a play, the basket should count.

Does this mean (when these two things are taken together), the "act of shooting" equals "try" or "tap"? I thought they were separate?

That is the simplistic inference of such an interpretation. Although, our discussions, here, indicate a contrary opinion.

While I understand that, I sure do like Walter's rant in the Big Lebowski about the rules.

My advice to anybody who has this in a college try out camp: count the basket. College mentality is that this is a great athletic and strong play by A1 and he is going to get rewarded for playing through the foul.

Serious question, would you count it at the HS level?

Just as importantly college coaches want this basket counted.

And they write the rules.

NBA's reasoning as well for counting the basket and I tend to agree with both of their reasoning

Yes. In a heartbeat.

Calling under NCAA rules in football and trying to keep up with the variety of philosophies that sometimes conflict directly with the rules, I certainly get it.

I know you do. :)

It's some other folks here who only look at the black and white of the rule book and think the game is being damaged if certain areas or "levels" have practical applications that don't always stick to the exact letter of the law.

Yes I would and I'm sure I've done so in the past.