End of game foul
 

Just processing in my head. Is their any difference between
Jump for try, foul, horn, release, land.

or

Jump for try, horn, foul, release, land?

Yes. (NFHS)

First situation: wipe the shot, as it was released late. Award the free throws with the lane cleared. If the end of the game, and the shots will not affect the final score, report the foul and that's it.

Second situation: ignore the foul unless intentional or flagrant.

correct answer, but I would not even report the foul (unless flagrant) in that specific situation

I would say in situation one, you only wipe the shot off if you don't have definite knowledge of how much time should be on the clock at the time of the foul. Otherwise if you do (have knowledge), put that time back on the clock and count the basket if applicable.

Agree.

Correct, I was envisioning the situation in the OP being so close that the timer didn't have time to stop the clock, but it was clear that the horn went off before the shot. Unless you have definite (read: looking at the clock) knowledge of the time left, you can't put time back on the clock.

We sometimes forget to get information from all parties.

The "you" in my post is plural :D

be specific
 

Then you should have said, "ya'll" or "you-uns":)

Or, in some parts, "all y'all." :)

Has anyone ever seen the OP actually happen?

1. I know the foul was before the buzzer.

2. I know the release was after the buzzer, so the basket doesn't count but we still shoot.

As written, this is the way it is. But there is a fundamental flaw here. If I know the above things are true, then I also know that the clock should have stopped with some small amount of time still showing. If this is not the case, the airborne shooter should be allowed to finish his try regardless of when the buzzer sounded if he is fouled. Perhaps an editorial revision/minor rule change is in order.

Yes I have seen it, and I disagree that there is a fundamental flaw. I do understand the logic, and wouldn't necessarily be opposed to a change, but any time you choose to put back on the clock is just as arbitrary as zero.

If there was a change, I wouldn't be for putting time back on the clock, but rather that an airborne shooter be allowed to finish after being fouled, even if the finish is after the buzzer.

I have seen it, once, and I ruled incorrectly.

That would be good...and the "right" solution.

With the presence of the foul, the shooter may have been able to release the shot before the buzzer. As such, it isn't entirely fair or just to not allow them to complete the shot if fouled before the horn.

Care to elaborate so we may all benefit?

Sounds pretty straightforward to me. What part do you think he needs to elaborate on?

If you mean that you wouldn't be putting time on the clock because someone didn't have knowledge of the clock, then I agree, this should be the interpretation IMO.

I think we've just nominated jar to write the NFHS and propose a rule change. :D

flaw to fundamental rule change
 

But there is a fundamental flaw here as well. "The shooter is allowed to finish after being fouled even if the finish is after the buzzer." Okay,the shot goes in to win the game. But, we agree the foul came before the buzzer meaning there has to be a miniscule amount of time left in the quarter. If we're going to change a fundamental rule to allow the shooter to finish the shot after the buzzer I feel it's only fair to put something back on the clock to allow the opponent to at least try a long pass and tap to score in return. The only problem is the shooter would first get his "and 1" which he undoubtedly would try to miss on purpose likely denying the opponent the chance to score all because we are changing the fundamental rule that the ball must be released before the buzzer. Don't like the idea.

It's not fair for the shooter to have his shot taken away because the official is a little late on his whistle, or the timer is a little late on stopping the clock and the officials don't have definite knowledge to correct anything.. In this case, I would rather reward the player that made a shot despite illegal contact, rather than worry about any hypothetical chance for Team B to get to score.

Pretty sure they already follow everything I post here.

That blarge thing is a done deal.

Oops, it was supposed to be a secret.

Disagree. No one took away the player's shot. The game at this level is played with the understanding that officials are always going to be a little late sounding the whistle following contact and the scoreboard person is always going to be a little late following the whistle. Instant replay is not an option (in most states) and even if it were, it would show there could be more than just a miniscule amount of time remaining that would be put back on the clock. That would give the opponent their fair chances. And some of those chances are not all that hypothetical. Goofy things can and do happen at any level of play. If I were the coach of that team, I would believe my players deserve that chance and I think you would as well.

Actually what is taken away is a field goal, which was taken after being fouled with time on the clock. APG is saying, and I agree, that taking these points off the board is much worse than denying the opponent an opportunity to go the length of the court in one or two tenths.

But you are taking away the successful field goal that at any other point in the game would count. Now there are justifiable reasons for the clock technically not stopping precisely as it should...there's always going to be some lag time with the timer...there will be some lag time between foul and whistle...but it still doesn't take away the fact that a field goal that would and should count otherwise is taken away.

Again, I'm not worried about the chances of a team to try and score a basket with .3 or whatever seconds. Could something happen? Sure...but I'm not concerned with that 2 percent scenario that could happen. I'm more concerned with rewarding what JUST happen...the player for making a field goal even with illegal contact.