Intentional foul and sub?

[JRutledge]

Only the sub for that player can shoot the FTs. The rules were quoted by Billy properly. What you might want to be aware of the NCAA rules are different and without getting too detailed the opposing coach can in some cases select the shooter if a player behaves as hurt. So do not get talked into do that in a NF Rules game.

Peace

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Only the sub for that player can shoot the FTs. The rules were quoted by Billy properly. What you might want to be aware of the NCAA rules are different and without getting too detailed the opposing coach can in some cases select the shooter if a player behaves as hurt. So do not get talked into do that in a NF Rules game.

Peace

For those who need to know: That would be NCAAM rules that are different. NCAAW rules are the same as NFHS in this case.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

For those who need to know: That would be NCAAM rules that are different. NCAAW rules are the same as NFHS in this case.

And someone trying to suggest you apply the NCAA rule would not care or know the difference.

Peace

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And someone trying to suggest you apply the NCAA rule would not care or know the difference.

Peace

Just trying to be accurate for the forum clientele. That's kind of what we do around here.

So a team can sub a better FT shooter for the "injured" player, shoot the FT's, and have the "injured" player reenter the game at the next dead ball or with a timeout? Seems like a big advantage to allow a better FT shooter to shoot.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by AremRed

So a team can sub a better FT shooter for the "injured" player, shoot the FT's, and have the "injured" player reenter the game at the next dead ball or with a timeout? Seems like a big advantage to allow a better FT shooter to shoot.

Well, first, the OP stated it was an intentional foul. I believe all rule sets are the same in that case (with the possible exception of FIBA). Second, how many times do you actually see this? I might have a sub shoot FTs once every season or two. Is it possible to cheat the system? Yeah, but that potential is trumped by the safety benefits of doing it the way it's done now. Players are less likely to try to play through an injury.

Originally Posted by Adam

Second, how many times do you actually see this?

Not often, but it happened to me.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

8-2: The free throw(s) awarded because of a personal foul shall be attempted by the
offended player. If such player must withdraw because of an injury or
disqualification, his/her substitute shall attempt the throw(s) unless no substitute
is available, in which case any teammate may attempt the throw(s) as selected by
the team captain or head coach.

Confucius says, "Must sit a tick, don’t have to play a tick".

When the rule says the injured player "must withdraw" does this mean for the entire game, or just for that period until he/she can reenter the game?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Adam

Well, first, the OP stated it was an intentional foul. I believe all rule sets are the same in that case (with the possible exception of FIBA). Second, how many times do you actually see this? I might have a sub shoot FTs once every season or two. Is it possible to cheat the system? Yeah, but that potential is trumped by the safety benefits of doing it the way it's done now. Players are less likely to try to play through an injury.

Well not really because NCAA and NBA does not have an intentional foul rule anymore. Now NCAA has a Flagrant 1 rule which is similar to an intentional foul. But that is why this can be confusing, because people try to suggest you are not apply the rule properly if you are not applying rules they see on TV more often.

And college coaches and I am sure NBA coaches certainly must have tried to cheat the system and I can assume that is why their rules are different then the NF on this issue.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by AremRed

So a team can sub a better FT shooter for the "injured" player, shoot the FT's, and have the "injured" player reenter the game at the next dead ball?

Don't forget the "sit a tick" rule. If the poor free throw shooting "injured" player is their best ball handler, or top scorer, or top defender, or their tallest front line player, and top rebounder, that player may have to sit on the bench for quite some time, possibly several minutes. It's seems like a small price to pay to get a good free throw shooter on the line, but it could come back to bite the coach in the butt. Add that to the fact that even the best free throw shooter can miss a few in a row, and even the worst free throw shooter can make a few in a row, so "taking advantage of the rules" becomes a real gamble, probably a good gamble but, nevertheless, a gamble.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Just trying to be accurate for the forum clientele. That's kind of what we do around here.

It was not the point. The point is someone is going to try to suggest a rule that most here will never be using. It happens all the time. I really do not care if it is women's or men's basketball, people still use the term NCAA as an all encompassing term. And if you want to be honest, the general public pays very little attention to Women's basketball (ratings, SC highlights), so does it really matter at this point?

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The general public pays very little attention to women's basketball.

True, but women's basketball still ranks higher then IRL (Indy Racing League) in most polls, so there must be a few million fans paying attention to women's basketball out there. We shouldn't discount those players, fans, coaches, parents, and officials, on the Forum. Whether it's high school girls basketball, or NCAA Women, or the WNBA, or Olympic women's basketball, or overseas women's basketball, it may not be to the liking of some, or many, Forum members, but it's still basketball, it needs good officiating, and it's worth our attention. Plus, the members of the Forum do not represent the "general public", most members care very deeply about basketball, in some cases, maybe a just few cases, female basketball, certainly more so than the general public.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

True, but women's basketball still ranks higher then IRL (Indy Racing League) in most polls, so there must be a few million fans paying attention to women's basketball out there. We shouldn't discount those players, fans, coaches, parents, and officials on the Forum. It's basketball, maybe not to the liking of some, or many, Forum members, but it's still basketball, it needs good officiating, and it's worth our attention.

This has nothing to do with discounting who supports a sport. This is about what is likely going to happen and what is likely you will have people claim is a rule at the NF or HS level? Still the percentage of people that quote a specific NCAA Women's rule is so rare I cannot think of the last time I have even heard a specific NCAA Women's suggested by a player or coach in the an actual game. And I was only trying to illustrate that there is a rules difference and someone might think the NF is the same as another level. It happens all the time where an NBA rule is assumed to apply. Who cares at this point of the NCAAM or NCAAW rule is different? And since I am the one that made the point to not apply the NCAA rule, it seems silly to point out where the the differences are at the NCAA level. I did not quote the NCAA rule on purpose.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Only the sub for that player can shoot the FTs.

To look at some crazy, hypothetical, once-in-million-years, permutations of this situation (as some of us often like to do): If A1 is unable, due to the injury, to attempt the free throws, and if there are no eligible substitutes available on Team A (injury, illness, disqualification), then the coach of Team A must select a free throw shooter from the other four Team A players on the court. If, however, the only available substitute on the Team A bench is A6, who is legally ineligible because has not yet "sat his tick" after a previous substitution (it's possible under a rare circumstance, but maybe not in the original post), then A6 must replace A1 and must attempt his free throws. The rule that a team must play with five players "trumps" the "sit a tick" rule.

Of course, its easier for all involved if A1 just "sucks it up" and shoots his own free throws.

Note: Favorite quote from a recent article in Sports Illustrated on baseball's designated hitter rule: "The designated hitter rule is like letting someone else take Wilt Chamberlain's free throws." (Rick Wise, pitcher, 15 career home runs)

[Bad Zebra]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

The rule that a team must play with five players "trumps" the "sit a tick" rule.

Based on what? Is that actually a rule or an assumption? I agree with you...seems like a logical way to do it, but I was wondering if that was an opinion of the Fed.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

Based on what? Is that actually a rule or an assumption? I agree with you...seems like a logical way to do it, but I was wondering if that was an opinion of the Fed.

Yes, it is.

It's been discussed here before -- you could try a search (recognizign that that doesn't always work well)