Striking the backboard

[Sharpshooternes]

Striking the backboard while trying to block a shot is really the only time it is legal to hit the backboard. Any other time or when it is on the ring, touching the backboard or in the cylinder should be a player technical foul correct?

[Freddy]

Mere touching not the issue... See 10.3.4 COMMENT for more explanation.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Freddy

See 10.3.4 COMMENT ...

... The purpose of the rule is to penalize intentional contact with the backboard while a shot or try is
involved or placing a hand on the backboard to gain an advantage. A player who
strikes either backboard so forcefully it cannot be ignored because it is an attempt
to draw attention to the player, or a means of venting frustration may be assessed
a technical foul pursuant to Rule 10-3-6.

10-3-4: A player shall not: Illegally contact the backboard/ring by:
a. Placing a hand on the backboard or ring to gain an advantage.
b. Intentionally slapping or striking the backboard or causing the ring to
vibrate while a try or tap is in flight or is touching the backboard or is in the
basket or in the cylinder above the basket.

From the list of The Most Misunderstood Basketball Rules (below):

A player cannot touch the ball, ring, or net while the ball is on the ring or within the basket. A player cannot touch the ball if it is in the imaginary cylinder above the ring. These are examples of basket interference. It is legal to touch the ring or the net if the ball is above the ring and not touching the ring, even if the ball is in the imaginary cylinder above the ring. It is legal to hang on the ring if a player is avoiding an injury to himself or herself or another player.

The backboard has nothing to do with goaltending. Goaltending is when a player touches the ball during a try, or tap, while it is in its downward flight, entirely above the basket ring level, and has the possibility of entering the basket. On most layups, the ball is going up after it contacts the backboard. It is legal to pin the ball against the backboard if it still on the way up and not in the imaginary cylinder above the basket. Slapping the backboard is neither basket interference nor is it goaltending and points cannot be awarded. A player who strikes a backboard, during a tap, or a try, so forcefully that it cannot be ignored because it is an attempt to draw attention to the player, or a means of venting frustration, may be assessed a technical foul. When a player simply attempts to block a shot and accidentally slaps the backboard it is neither a violation nor is it a technical foul.

[Sharpshooternes]

So goal tending can only happen on the initial downward flight? If the ball bounces up off of the rim, any further interference with the ball in the cylinder HAS TO be BI. Is this a valid assessment?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

So goal tending can only happen on the initial downward flight? If the ball bounces up off of the rim, any further interference with the ball in the cylinder HAS TO be BI. Is this a valid assessment?

Goaltending occurs when a player:
1) Touches the ball during a field-goal try or tap
2) While it is in its downward flight
3) While it is entirely above the basket ring level
4) Has the possibility of entering the basket in flight
Many, including my interpreter, add:
5) While not in the cylinder.

GT for the win

GT for the win

GT for the win

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Goaltending occurs when a player:
1) Touches the ball during a field-goal try or tap
2) While it is in its downward flight
3) While it is entirely above the basket ring level
4) Has the possibility of entering the basket in flight
Many, including my interpreter, add:
5) While not in the cylinder.

GT for the win

GT for the win

GT for the win

So that play referenced in the old thread is (in NFHS) actually a BI because the player was touching the net while the ball was on the rim. (And likely in the cylinder). So on an upward bounce it has to be BI whereas a downward trajectory could be either.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

So that play referenced in the old thread is (in NFHS) actually a BI because the player was touching the net while the ball was on the rim. (And likely in the cylinder). So on an upward bounce it has to be BI whereas a downward trajectory could be either.

If the ball is on the rim, it has to be in the cylinder. (If the ball is touching just the side of the rim, it's not BI)

If the ball has hit the rim and bounded up, if it has a chance to go in, it must be in the cylinder, so GT is impossible.

That said, other than on a FT, what does it matter?

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

If the ball is on the rim, it has to be in the cylinder. (If the ball is touching just the side of the rim, it's not BI)

If the ball has hit the rim and bounded up, if it has a chance to go in, it must be in the cylinder, so GT is impossible.

That said, other than on a FT, what does it matter?

So if the ball is on the way up from a bounce off the rim, in the cylinder and it is knocked away is it BI or GT?

Because it matters on a free throw.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

So if the ball is on the way up from a bounce off the rim, in the cylinder and it is knocked away is it BI or GT?

Because it matters on a free throw.

I think 4-22 covers it pretty clearly. You might also need 4-20 to know when a FT attempt ends.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

So if the ball is on the way up from a bounce off the rim, in the cylinder and it is knocked away is it BI or GT?

Because it matters on a free throw.

Short of some magical wind in the gym (or for a game on an aircraft carrier), a try is subject to being goaltended until it starts to cross over the edge of the rim and then it is only subject to being interfered with. Once it crosses entirely out of the cylinder, it would be fair game. So, if it is bounced up, it can only be BI (in the cylinder) or legal (out of the cylinder).


The only relevance to a FT is that GT on a FT is a T. If you think about it, there is no possible way to legally block a FT so GT is an deliberate infraction of the rules whereas BI is more about the distinction between a legal rebound and getting to the ball too early. In fact, GT on a FT means the shooter will be getting a substitute shot since, short of having excessively long arms, it would normally be impossible to block a FT without entering the lane.

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Short of some magical wind in the gym (or for a game on an aircraft carrier), a try is subject to being goaltended until it starts to cross over the edge of the rim and then it is only subject to being interfered with. Once it crosses entirely out of the cylinder, it would be fair game. So, if it is bounced up, it can only be BI (in the cylinder) or legal (out of the cylinder).


The only relevance to a FT is that GT on a FT is a T. If you think about it, there is no possible way to legally block a FT so GT is an deliberate infraction of the rules whereas BI is more about the distinction between a legal rebound and getting to the ball too early. In fact, GT on a FT means the shooter will be getting a substitute shot since, short of having excessively long arms, it would normally be impossible to block a FT without entering the lane.

Thanks Cameron. This is a very helpful description. So basically a try and the penalty is a continuum that begins with a GT. As soon as the ball breaks the cylinder, it then can only be BI from then on, no longer goal tending. Then the ball becomes legal after leaving the cylinder and is no longer touching the rim.

I have also been pondering how it was possible to GT a FT and see from your description why it is penalized as a T.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

A try is subject to being goaltended until it starts to cross over the edge of the rim and then it is only subject to being interfered with.

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

As soon as the ball breaks the cylinder, it then can only be BI from then on, no longer goal tending..

I haven't gotten my new rulebook yet, but for the past few years the reference to "outside the cylinder" was missing from the rule, and an official could call either goaltending, or basket interference, for such a play.

2002-03 NFHS 4-22: Goaltending occurs when a player touches the ball during a field-goal try or tap while: a) the ball is in downward flight. b) the entire ball is above the level of the basket ring. c) the ball has the possibility of entering the basket in flight. d) the ball is not touching an imaginary cylinder which has the basket ring as it's lower base.

2012-13 NFHS 4-22: Goaltending occurs when a player touches the ball during a field-goal try or tap while it is in its downward flight entirely above the basket ring level and has the possibility of entering the basket in flight.

Striking the backboard

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

I have also been pondering how it was possible to GT a FT and see from your description why it is penalized as a T.

4-22 "... touches the ball outside the cylinder during a FT attempt"

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

In fact, GT on a FT means the shooter will be getting a substitute shot since, short of having excessively long arms, it would normally be impossible to block a FT without entering the lane.

Why would he get a substitute shot when we're awarding the point?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

...The only relevance to a FT is that GT on a FT is a T. If you think about it, there is no possible way to legally block a FT so GT is an deliberate infraction of the rules whereas BI is more about the distinction between a legal rebound and getting to the ball too early. In fact, GT on a FT means the shooter will be getting a substitute shot since, short of having excessively long arms, it would normally be impossible to block a FT without entering the lane.

Wouldn't a GT on a FT count as 1 point, therefore no need to shoot a substitute FT? We would then shoot 2 FTs for the technical foul?