Shooter...Foul...Horn...Release (Men's NCAA)

[All_Heart]

Looking for the Men's NCAA Rule interpretation on this play:

With 50 seconds remaining in overtime, A-1 is fouled in the act of shooting, but the shot clock expires before the ball is released. A-1 continues with the try which is successful. The official should count the goal and award A-1 a free throw. True or False


Rule 11-2.1 Officials may use such available equipment only in the following situations:

e. Violations.

In the last two minutes of the second period and overtime(s), to determine the following:

1. Whether a shot clock violation occurred.

2. Which team caused the ball to go out of bounds when there is a deflection involving two or more players.

A.R. 271 With zeros on the game clock, A1 is fouled in the act of shooting and then after the foul, A1 releases the ball for a try for goal. A1's try is:

(1) Successful; or

(2) Unsuccessful.

RULING: When a foul and a try for goal sequentially occur at the expiration of time, the official shall use the monitor to determine whether the foul and the try occurred before the reading of zeros on the game clock.

(1) When it is determined that the foul occurred before the reading of zeros on the game clock but the try was not released before the reading of zeros, the foul shall be penalized. With the use of the monitor, the official shall be permitted to put the exact time on the game clock as to when the foul occurred. When the officials determine that time should be put back on the game clock, the game has not ended and the goal shall count. When the time of the foul cannot be determined, the official shall be permitted to put the exact time back on the game clock when it can be determined as to when the ball passed through the net. When it is determined with the use of the monitor that both the foul and the try occurred before the reading of zeros on the game clock, the foul shall be penalized and the goal shall count.

(2) Since the try was unsuccessful, the official shall use the monitor to determine whether the foul occurred before the reading of zeros on the game clock. When it is determined that the foul occurred before the reading of zeros, the foul shall be penalized. When it can be determined, the officials shall be permitted to put back on the game clock the exact time as to when the foul occurred.

(Rule 11-3.1.a.1 and .3)

[JetMetFan]

A shot-clock try for field goal is defined as the ball having left the shooter’s hand(s) before the sounding of the shot-clock horn and then striking the ring or flange, or entering the basket.

No goal. A1 shoots 2 or 3 FTs.

[All_Heart]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

No goal. A1 shoots 2 or 3 FTs.

Does the fact that we are under 2 minutes, which allows us to review the monitor for shot clock timing mistakes, come into play. I believe this would be considered a timing mistake so we would be allowed to review it and which we would then be allowed to score the goal. However, if we don't have a monitor then I don't think we would be allowed to score the goal unless we have definite knowledge. Anybody agree with this?

Essentially I feel like this question is leaving out if we have a monitor available or not which is important information in order to properly answer the question. Although I may be missing something here (wouldn't be the 1st time).

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by All_Heart

Does the fact that we are under 2 minutes, which allows us to review the monitor for shot clock timing mistakes, come into play. I believe this would be considered a timing mistake so we would be allowed to review it and which we would then be allowed to score the goal. However, if we don't have a monitor then I don't think we would be allowed to score the goal unless we have definite knowledge. Anybody agree with this?

Essentially I feel like this question is leaving out if we have a monitor available or not which is important information in order to properly answer the question. Although I may be missing something here (wouldn't be the 1st time).

The question is assuming that either (a) there is no monitor and the officials judge the shot clock expired first, or (b) there is a monitor and after review it is determined that the shot clock expired first.

IOW, it doesn't matter whether there is a monotor or not -- that's not the point of the question.

[All_Heart]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The question is assuming that either (a) there is no monitor and the officials judge the shot clock expired first, or (b) there is a monitor and after review it is determined that the shot clock expired first.

IOW, it doesn't matter whether there is a monitor or not -- that's not the point of the question.

Okay, if you think that is what they are looking for. I figured since they put in the time in overtime and it is under 2 minutes that they were looking for our knowledge on the new rule regarding monitor review of shot clock.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by All_Heart

Does the fact that we are under 2 minutes, which allows us to review the monitor for shot clock timing mistakes, come into play. I believe this would be considered a timing mistake so we would be allowed to review it and which we would then be allowed to score the goal. However, if we don't have a monitor then I don't think we would be allowed to score the goal unless we have definite knowledge. Anybody agree with this?

Essentially I feel like this question is leaving out if we have a monitor available or not which is important information in order to properly answer the question. Although I may be missing something here (wouldn't be the 1st time).

Try not to read other information into those questions. The shot-clock horn going off before the ball is released isn't necessarily a timing mistake and there's nothing in the OP to indicate it was.

[Raymond]

I too thought this was a bad question because with a monitor you can determine when the clock should have stopped per the whistle and foul signal.

[Raymond]

But A.R. 271 does refer to the game clock, not the shot clock. So that type of review may not be valid for fouls/shot clock determinations.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I too thought this was a bad question because with a monitor you can determine when the clock should have stopped per the whistle and foul signal.

Agreed. The important issue is whether the foul is whistled before the shot clock sounds, yet, that information isn't in the question.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I too thought this was a bad question because with a monitor you can determine when the clock should have stopped per the whistle and foul signal.

Vindication is mine:

Originally Posted by RULES INTERPRETATIONS, CLARIFICATIONS, AND CASE PLAYS - NOVEMBER 13, 2013

PLAY 2: Near the end of the second period, A1 is fouled in the act of shooting but before releasing the ball for a try. After the foul, the shot clock horn sounds followed immediately by the release of the ball for a shot attempt and the sounding of the game clock horn. A1’s try is:
1. Successful; or
2. Unsuccessful
RULING:
When a foul and a try for goal sequentially occur at the expiration of time on the shot clock, the official shall use the monitor to determine whether the foul and try occurred before the sounding of the shot clock horn.
1. When it is determined that the foul occurred before the expiration of the shot clock but the try was not released before the sounding of the shot clock horn, the foul shall be penalized. With the use of the monitor, the official shall be permitted to put the exact time on the game clock when the foul occurred. When the officials determine that time should be put back on the game clock, the shot clock horn should never have sounded and the goal shall count.

And my test score was adjusted from a 90 to a 92.

[BryanV21]

What isn't mentioned is that the clock (shot clock or game clock) should have been stopped by the official as soon as the foul occurred. Therefore the time on either clock would not have expired.

However, the try for goal is allowed to continue to determine how the foul is penalized.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Vindication is mine:



And my test score was adjusted from a 90 to a 92.

Well, now I'm up to a 96, so they screwed the pooch on 3 questions.