![]() |
Resumption of Play Issue
Let's use NFHS rules for this question. Team A is at the line for two free throws when a timeout is called. The 2nd horn sounds after the timeout is over. Team A is in position to shoot the free throws along with their two players in the second slots of the lane on both sides. However, Team B is not coming out of the huddle and is still on the sideline. Official bounces ball to shooter for 1st shot. In the meantime, the free throwers teammate, in the 2nd slot on the side of the lane, decides to move down to the lower spot since it's unoccupied and gets call for a violation. The officials don't allow the shot and give the ball to Team B. Question : Since the low block was not occupied by any member of Team B, this falls under resumption of play, doesn't it? If the free throw is missed, an alternate shot would be attempted. Furthermore, if Team B doesn't fill the low block for the alternate shot, at this point a Technical foul would be called, correct? Since no person was originally in the low block where Team B was suppose to be, would not the infraction by Team A's player for moving into that spot be ignored? Anyone have a rule # or case play reference. Why the officials did not drag two players from Team B down to the low block positions, I don't know. I would have strongly demanded that they be filled until they were.
|
The violation by A is not "ignored". Since B wasn't in the spots, it's a double violation.
Go to the second throw. If B is still not in the spots, it's a T. |
What Bob said.
You won't find a specific case play dealing with this, but you can read the case plays on resumption of play and the case plays on lane violations and put the two together. |
It is not a resumption of play because that rule covers only the free throw shooter. The rules require the defense to occupy the first two spaces ("shall") and the free throw must not be administered if they are not. If the coach refuses or delays, it is a technical foul.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
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.
|
Johnny D, that's exactly what I was thinking. Isn't there an instance involving a free throw, where if a violation is committed the 2nd one is ignored? I could be way off base?
|
Quote:
|
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:
|
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.
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:02pm. |