![]() |
|
|
|||
One of the things that makes this forum so much fun is getting to help each other out and argue about things.
|
|
|||
I am going to throw this out there for the hell of it. When team B commits the first violation, by not occupying the bottom spot, couldnt the second violation by team A be ignored since both violations involved players/non-players in marked lane spaces.
|
|
|||
I guess you could, but it would be wrong by rule. The only time we ignore a second violation is if the first one caused the second. This doesn't apply in this situation.
|
|
|||
Quote:
and the try is successful, the goal shall count, and the violation shall be disregarded. When the try is not successful, the ball shall become dead when the free throw ends, and a substitute free throw shall be attempted by the same free-thrower under the same conditions as those for the original free throw. Copied and pasted directly from the NCAA rule book. Maybe the NFHS wording is different, I dont recall exact phrasing they have. But the NCAA wording says nothing about the first violation causing the second violation, just the order they occur. |
|
|||
Quote:
Edited to add NFHS rule... Quote:
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association Last edited by Camron Rust; Wed Feb 27, 2013 at 05:32pm. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Would there not be a violation by the free throw shooter's opponent first since they are not in the low block where they are suppose to be? If this took place, I would have a fist out signaling a violation by the non shooting team.
|
|
|||
Quote:
This is a lane space violation and the rules regarding lane spaces is what would apply. It is pretty clear that they only want the first of those is to be penalized. Assuming the teammate of the shooter is not already there when the ball is made live, the lack of a defender being in the first space occurs the moment the ball is live and all other lane space violations are ignored. If the teammate of the shooter is there at the time the ball is made live, then it is a simultaneous violation and both are penalized (and the referee is slapped).
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association Last edited by Camron Rust; Thu Feb 28, 2013 at 03:31am. |
|
|||
I'm going to disagree. 9-1-2 makes it absolutely clear that the lane spaces must be properly occupied as in 8-1-4 which says during a free throw, the first spaces shall be occupied by opponents of the free thrower and no teammate of the free thrower can occupy these spaces. Essentially, the situation is the same as the casebook play where the defense and offense are in the wrong spaces 9.1.2: the defense is not in the first spaces and the offense is and should be ruled accordingly to that caseplay IMO.
Last edited by billyu2; Wed Feb 27, 2013 at 10:21pm. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
If both offenders are in a marked lane-space, the second violation is ignored, as in penalty item (2).
Quote:
Therefore, what we have is more akin to a defender outside the 3pt line committing a violation by entering the 3pt area, then an offensive player in a marked lane space leaving his space too early. That is a double violation. I'm going with Bob's original answer in post #2. |
|
|||
Quote:
I think the "ignore the second" is in place because the committee thinks it's unreasonable for someone in a lane space NOT to react to someone else moving in early -- it's similar to the "only the fake is penalized" reasoning. In this play, there's no reason for the offensive player to react. So, I'm penalizing him/her, too. |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Resumption of Play | jdmara | Basketball | 12 | Thu Nov 19, 2009 08:26pm |
Resumption of play | jdmara | Basketball | 7 | Sat Nov 01, 2008 01:18am |
Resumption of Play???? | joseph2493 | Basketball | 27 | Fri Feb 15, 2008 10:27am |
Resumption of play | Mendy Trent | Basketball | 6 | Wed Oct 11, 2006 08:34am |
Resumption of play?? | ref4e | Basketball | 7 | Tue Jan 22, 2002 11:14pm |