The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 05, 2013, 09:51am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 185
Why is a foul worth 3 points...

Jump shooter inside the arc makes his attempt, misses, and is fouled while he is still in the air. He is awarded 2 FTs.

Same jump shooter is outside the arc, makes his attempt and misses, and is fouled while still in the air. He is awarded 3 FTs.

Why the difference? I assume the FTs are awarded because a player must be protected while in the air, but is the player more vulnerable by 1 FT just because he's behind the arc?

I realize this isn't a rules question per se, but so many of you know the philosophy of certain rules.

Thanks...
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 05, 2013, 09:58am
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,556
I will be honest, I am confused you are asking the question.

It should be obvious, if you do not give a shooter 3 shoots on a foul when they are shooting a 3 pointer, then you will have defenders just foul the shooter in close games so that they only get two points at most instead of 3. The philosophy seems rather self-explanitory if you ask me.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 05, 2013, 10:07am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 185
No. It is NOT obvious. In each case the player has already made his attempt and missed. His opportunity to score 2 or 3 points, depending on his location on the court, was NOT changed by the foul AFTER the shot was released. The FTs are awarded because a shooter in the air must be protected. He is equally vulnerable in both cases, but the award is different.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 05, 2013, 10:09am
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by bellnier View Post
No. It is NOT obvious. In each case the player has already made his attempt and missed. His opportunity to score 2 or 3 points, depending on his location on the court, was NOT changed by the foul AFTER the shot was released.
Obviously you are not familiar with the term "airborne shooter".

And since I guarantee you will not be happy with any answer given here you might want to try sending an email to Mr. Adams or Ms. Williamson or whoever handles IAABO and NFHS rules.

But I don't think you really want an answer b/c the answer is quite obvious. I think you just don't like the rule and want to vent about it.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR

Last edited by Raymond; Wed Jun 05, 2013 at 10:12am.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 05, 2013, 10:12am
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by bellnier View Post
No. It is NOT obvious. In each case the player has already made his attempt and missed. His opportunity to score 2 or 3 points, depending on his location on the court, was NOT changed by the foul AFTER the shot was released. The FTs are awarded because a shooter in the air must be protected. He is equally vulnerable in both cases, but the award is different.
You lost me on this one. I think the only explanation is what BNR stated about knowing what an airborne shooter is or not.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 05, 2013, 11:34pm
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Toledo, Ohio, U.S.A.
Posts: 8,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by bellnier View Post
No. It is NOT obvious. In each case the player has already made his attempt and missed. His opportunity to score 2 or 3 points, depending on his location on the court, was NOT changed by the foul AFTER the shot was released. The FTs are awarded because a shooter in the air must be protected. He is equally vulnerable in both cases, but the award is different.

The FTs were awarded because A1 was fouled by B1 while A1 was, by definition in the Act of Shooting. In the scenario you described A1 was fouled by B1 after A1 had released the ball but was still airborne.

Consider the following play: A1 is attempting a Set Shot (insert Red Koltzman joke here) and is fouled by B1 before A1 releases the ball from a point a) inside the Three-point Arc, or b) outside the Three-point Arc. A1's attempt in both (a) and (b) is unsuccessful. How many FTs is A1 awarded? Two for (a) and three for (b).

My play is no different from your play because in both plays A1 is fouled in the Act of Shooting.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. JR's first post is a valid reason for the rule as written. Furthermore, I do not feel like climbing up into the attic (at this time of night: almost 12:4amEDT) but if my memory serves me correctly, the first year the Three-point FG was in effect in both NFHS and NCAA the penalty section was not amended to award three FTs when A1 was fouled attempting an unsuccessful Three-point FG.
__________________
Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Trumbull Co. (Warren, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn.
Wood Co. (Bowling Green, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn.
Ohio Assn. of Basketball Officials
International Assn. of Approved Bkb. Officials
Ohio High School Athletic Association
Toledo, Ohio

Last edited by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.; Wed Jun 05, 2013 at 11:39pm. Reason: Added P.S.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 05, 2013, 10:08am
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by bellnier View Post
Jump shooter inside the arc makes his attempt, misses, and is fouled while he is still in the air. He is awarded 2 FTs.

Same jump shooter is outside the arc, makes his attempt and misses, and is fouled while still in the air. He is awarded 3 FTs.

Why the difference? I assume the FTs are awarded because a player must be protected while in the air, but is the player more vulnerable by 1 FT just because he's behind the arc?

I realize this isn't a rules question per se, but so many of you know the philosophy of certain rules.

Thanks...
Obviously the rules makers think a shot made from outside the arc is worth 1 more point than a shot from inside the arc so why would you think they wouldn't give 1 more free throw?
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 05, 2013, 10:12am
Official & Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by bellnier View Post
Why the difference? I assume the FTs are awarded because a player must be protected while in the air, but is the player more vulnerable by 1 FT just because he's behind the arc?
Thanks...
The number of free throws has nothing to do with level of vulnerability. It has to do with the number of points being attempted (thusly, the shooters location) at the point the foul was committed. Theoretically, if a shooter is attempting a three point shot, and is subsequently fouled, the fouler has denied the shooter the possibility of successfully sinking the three point attempt. Thus, the remedy for the foul is three uncontested shots from 15 ft. If the shooter is fouled on a two point attempt, the remedy is only two uncontested shots. That's a pretty fundamental concept of this game.
__________________
Calling it both ways...since 1999

Last edited by Bad Zebra; Wed Jun 05, 2013 at 10:15am.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 05, 2013, 10:19am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bad Zebra View Post
The number of free throws has nothing to do with level of vulnerability. It has to do with the number of points being attempted (thusly, the shooters location) at the point the foul was committed. Theoretically, if a shooter is attempting a three point shot, and is subsequently fouled, the fouler has denied the shooter the possibility of successfully sinking the three point attempt. Thus, the remedy for the foul is three uncontested shots from 15 ft. If the shooter is fouled on a two point attempt, the remedy is only two uncontested shots. That's a pretty fundamental concept of this game.
I guess I just don't get it. And, BTW, I have no agenda. Just confused. In both scenarios the player made his attempt BEFORE the foul. The subsequent foul did NOT interfere in the attempts in any way. Seems illogical then to have different awards for a foul that did not change the attempt. PS, instead of lecturing me about my obvious misunderstanding of an airborne player, it might have been nicer to just explain it to me.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 05, 2013, 10:25am
Official & Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by bellnier View Post
I guess I just don't get it. And, BTW, I have no agenda. Just confused. In both scenarios the player made his attempt BEFORE the foul. The subsequent foul did NOT interfere in the attempts in any way. Seems illogical then to have different awards for a foul that did not change the attempt. PS, instead of lecturing me about my obvious misunderstanding of an airborne player, it might have been nicer to just explain it to me.
Don't mean to lecture...just trying to understand where your confusion is based.

I guess the way to look at it is to assume the foul can potentially (and likely) cause the shot to miss. If that's the case, the shooter should be awarded the number of uncontested shots that he was denied due to the foul.

I think part of your difference of opinion is rooted in the fact that you believe "Seems illogical then to have different awards for a foul that did not change the attempt". As officials, we operate under the assumption that a foul occuring DURING A SHOT can "change the attempt". We make that call based on the definition of when a shot begins and ends according to the rulebook. Believe it or not, when a shot begins and ends is a pretty significant concept. It may not be obvious to you if you're a casual fan. That's not meant to be an insult. There are some nuances to this game that are more complicated than you realize.
__________________
Calling it both ways...since 1999

Last edited by Bad Zebra; Wed Jun 05, 2013 at 10:45am.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 05, 2013, 10:30am
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by bellnier View Post
I guess I just don't get it. And, BTW, I have no agenda. Just confused. In both scenarios the player made his attempt BEFORE the foul. The subsequent foul did NOT interfere in the attempts in any way. Seems illogical then to have different awards for a foul that did not change the attempt. PS, instead of lecturing me about my obvious misunderstanding of an airborne player, it might have been nicer to just explain it to me.
Well usually when people come there they are officials and it is obvious their understanding of some basic rules. You have to help us to help you if you are the one not understanding. And this is such a weird question that it would take us a time to know your lack of understanding of other rules.

But and airborne shooter is still in the act of shooting until they come back to the floor. So if a player is fouled while still an airborne shooter, they are considered to be shooting from where they left the floor.

Still I do not get why you would be confused. It is simple, the rules are not going to give an strategic advantage to the defense to just foul a shooter of a 3 point shot so that in a close game or normal situations the offensive team is not awarded what they were attempting to score.

If we use your logic for example. In a close game with seconds left, and a game margin with 3 or 2 points, what would prevent the defense from just fouling a shooter to either prevent the offense from tying or winning the game and purposely sending the team to the FT line to make fewer points that would help them win the game when a foul was called? Common sense should tell you that would be a great advantage and put no pressure on the defense to have to play defense or not foul to give what is considered an easier opportunity to score. And then take away an extra point opportunity and would make the game in some cases less exciting.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 05, 2013, 12:04pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by bellnier View Post
I guess I just don't get it. And, BTW, I have no agenda. Just confused. In both scenarios the player made his attempt BEFORE the foul. The subsequent foul did NOT interfere in the attempts in any way. Seems illogical then to have different awards for a foul that did not change the attempt. PS, instead of lecturing me about my obvious misunderstanding of an airborne player, it might have been nicer to just explain it to me.
So, to your way of thinking, if the basket is made, should the shooter still be given 2 shots rather than 1?
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 05, 2013, 12:49pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn View Post
So, to your way of thinking, if the basket is made, should the shooter still be given 2 shots rather than 1?
That's where I was headed next. All airborne shooters, no matter where on the court, or the result of the shot, should then be given the same amount of free throws.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jun 08, 2013, 07:22pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SE Ohio
Posts: 1,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn View Post
So, to your way of thinking, if the basket is made, should the shooter still be given 2 shots rather than 1?
If we want to add another layer of fun to this...if after the ball leaves the shooter's hand a subsequent foul would be considered a non shooting foul and we are into no shots/one and one or two shot territory.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jun 09, 2013, 08:33am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB View Post
If we want to add another layer of fun to this...if after the ball leaves the shooter's hand a subsequent foul would be considered a non shooting foul and we are into no shots/one and one or two shot territory.
Thats what it would be if no other rules changes were made -- that was my point in post #11.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
7 points in a championship game....7 dang points?! OrStBballRef Basketball 30 Tue Mar 20, 2012 10:17am
is this worth a T ? aReferee Basketball 55 Mon Feb 27, 2012 01:37pm
Is it worth it??? bigdog5142 Basketball 24 Thu Aug 30, 2007 08:17pm
For what it's worth greymule Softball 28 Wed Mar 19, 2003 02:21pm
For What It's Worth Bfair Baseball 2 Tue Jan 22, 2002 02:28am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:21pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1