NBA Ruling ONLY: counting a try that wasn't successful? (Video added)

[Nevadaref]

Need some help from the members here who follow the NBA and know the rules for that league.
Was flipping channels and saw a few minutes of this game tonight.
With about minutes remaining in the third quarter an OKC player attempted a 3pt shot from in front of the Memphis bench. A team member on the bench stood up and swung a towel over his shoulder, and apparently there was a second towel either inside that one or in his hand which flew out onto the court near the shooter. The try was NOT successful.
The official called a T, don't know to whom it gets charged (specific individual or team bench, coach, etc.) which makes perfect sense to me (one shot T was administered).
However, the crew also decided to count the basket! That I have a hard time accepting, but it certainly could be the correct NBA ruling. So I'm posting to ask those here who know.
1. Can someone post the NBA rule?
2. Was counting the basket correct?
3. Was awarding one shot correct? (I know that most, if not all, Ts on players in the NBA are only one shot.)
4. Possession was awarded to Memphis following the FT. Was that correct?

I ask because this would be handled very differently in a HS or college game.
Thanks.

[APG]

Edit:

Here's a clip of the play:





Yes this was handled correctly. The technical was handed to Tony Allen. This is a 2-3 situation.

Here's the case book play:

330. Player A1 is in the act of shooting when Player B1, who has lost a shoe, throws the shoe in the direction of the ball. What is the ruling if: (a) the ball has been released, (b) the ball has not been released.

In both (a) and (b), Player A1 shall be awarded points for the type of field goal attempted and a technical foul shall be called on Player B1. After the free throw attempt, the ball shall be awarded to Team B as after any score. This ruling shall apply for any object thrown by any player, coach or trainer on the court or on the bench whether or not it contacts the ball or shooter.
RULE 2- SECTION III
RULE 12A - SECTION V - a

Originally Posted by APG

Here's the case book play:

Hmm, my case book says the number is 324.

Anyway, a weird situation.

[APG]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Hmm, my case book says the number is 324.

Anyway, a weird situation.

Check your date...that's last year's edition.

[Nevadaref]

Thanks for posting the ruling. I figured that the official was correct because the NBA guys get fined whenever they kick a rule, thus they take rules study and application very seriously.

[MathReferee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Thanks for posting the ruling. I figured that the official was correct because the NBA guys get fined whenever they kick a rule, thus they take rules study and application very seriously.

Interesting. They were discussing this exact thing on Mike & Mike this morning regarding baseball umpires and the increasing pressure for more accountability. I wonder if the media knows this is the case for NBA refs. I certainly did not.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by AustinRef

Interesting. They were discussing this exact thing on Mike & Mike this morning regarding baseball umpires and the increasing pressure for more accountability. I wonder if the media knows this is the case for NBA refs. I certainly did not.

If the media cares, they know.

[APG]

Originally Posted by AustinRef

Interesting. They were discussing this exact thing on Mike & Mike this morning regarding baseball umpires and the increasing pressure for more accountability. I wonder if the media knows this is the case for NBA refs. I certainly did not.

The media and fans in general think that officials aren't held accountable for missed calls and what not at any level. Now I don't know about MLB or the NHL, but they couldn't be further from the truth when it comes to the NBA and NFL.