Free Throw Situation

[Wellmer]

A1 is at the line to shoot 2 free throws. He bounces it 3-4 times and loses it and it slowly rolls toward the side of the lane when B1 steps into the lane to get the ball. What do you have? Violation on A1 since he wasn't going to be able to retrieve the ball without violating anyway or a double violation since B1 stepped in?

[Rich1]

As soon as A1 violates the ball is dead. There can be no violation on B at that point.

[JRutledge]

I am not so sure about that completely. Is it a violation just because A1 fumbles the ball? Or is it a violation because A1 is not going to likely have a successful FT attempt? And the reason I am thinking this is we only ignore lane-line violations and the one by A1 is not considered a lane line violation as they are not considered on the lane. If A1 had missed a the rim they would not be a lane-line violation. I think we would have a double violation, unless there is rules support that suggest the second A1 fumbles the ball into the lane (and cannot retrieve it without violating) is automatically a violation. I think there is a case play on this one.

9.1.1 says it is a violation for A1 when they muff the ball it is a violation, but it does not make clear when that violation actually takes place.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am not so sure about that completely. Is it a violation just because A1 fumbles the ball? Or is it a violation because A1 is not going to likely have a successful FT attempt? And the reason I am thinking this is we only ignore lane-line violations and the one by A1 is not considered a lane line violation as they are not considered on the lane. If A1 had missed a the rim they would not be a lane-line violation. I think we would have a double violation, unless there is rules support that suggest the second A1 fumbles the ball into the lane (and cannot retrieve it without violating) is automatically a violation. I think there is a case play on this one.

9.1.1 says it is a violation for A1 when they muff the ball it is a violation, but it does not make clear when that violation actually takes place.

Peace

I'm just going with the violation on A. I'm not going to penalize B for being nice.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Adam

I'm just going with the violation on A. I'm not going to penalize B for being nice.

That is what it pretty much suggests. I guess I was thinking if the muff the ball and did not get completely away from the shooter. I have seen that happen and no one moved.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

That is what it pretty much suggests. I guess I was thinking if the muff the ball and did not get completely away from the shooter. I have seen that happen and no one moved.

Peace

If it's within the shooter's reach when B1 steps in to get the ball, I'm going with the violation on B1. Kill the play, start over with a delayed violation.

[TwoDot]

I have always been advised when the ball is fumbled, to blow the whistle and re-administer the free throw. No violation until a player breaks the plane. I always like to prevent those if I can.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by TwoDot

I have always been advised when the ball is fumbled, to blow the whistle and re-administer the free throw. No violation until a player breaks the plane. I always like to prevent those if I can.

That was the philosophy until the case play was added maybe 8 years ago.