Shooting at the wrong basket case plays

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

These questions can't be answered (the way the original poster intended the situation to be) until the original poster cleans up his language in regard to whose basket is really being shot at. Otherwise, we will confuse ourselves to death trying to answer the questions. We can try to figure out what he really meant, but we're not mind readers.

Originally Posted by bballref3966

The OP's situation described the player shooting at his "own basket," which would be a try.

Well, his subject did indicate the shots were at the "wrong" basket even if his subsequent description was not consistent with that. Given that "wrong" is pretty much clear, it doesn't matter if he doesn't understand the technicalities of which basket belongs to each team. His point and questions were clear enough.

The actions in the OP's cases were not trys.

Then, the question about whether the action (in case #1) is legal or not depends on other factors not mentioned. Did the player move/jump in the process of throwing the ball at the wrong basket and retrieving the ball?

In the 2nd case, the ball becomes dead at the time of the foul and it is not a shooting foul. The fouled player would only shoot FTs if his/her team were in the bonus. The basket will only be counted if it had passed through the basket at the time of the foul, otherwise, no score since the ball would have been dead.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

His point and questions were clear enough.

Clear? Really?

Originally Posted by Adam

It is not a try when a player attempts to score at the wrong basket. Look under the definition of a try.

Originally Posted by bballref3966

The OP's situation described the player shooting at his "own basket," which would be a try.

The subject line "wrong basket" does give us a clue about what he wants to know, and I think that I know what he means, but his actual post wording has still created a lot of confusion on the Forum, among some pretty astute Forum members.

I like Camron Rust's answers, but they can still be challenged based on confusion regarding the wording "own basket".

It's just a poorly written question that really can't be answered.

Do you still beat your wife? Do you really want to answer that?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Clear? Really?





The subject line "wrong basket" does give us a clue about what he wants to know, and I think that I know what he means, but his actual post wording has still created a lot of confusion on the Forum, among some pretty astute Forum members.

I like Camron Rust's answers, but they can still be challenged based on confusion regarding the wording "own basket".

It's just a poorly written question that really can't be answered.

Do you still beat your wife? Do you really want to answer that?

My wife has a saying when I start getting picky about her words,
"Don't make me connect the dots when you already know what the picture looks like."

We knew what he meant based on the title and the 2nd scenario.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Adam

My wife has a saying when I start getting picky about her words,
"Don't make me connect the dots when you already know what the picture looks like."

We knew what he meant based on the title and the 2nd scenario.

Most definitely...and the fact that several people pointed out that he incorrectly labeled the baskets, so it was obvious what his intentions were with the question.

[HokiePaul]

Originally Posted by Adam

My wife has a saying when I start getting picky about her words,
"Don't make me connect the dots when you already know what the picture looks like."

We knew what he meant based on the title and the 2nd scenario.

Agree. And the fact that it would be nearly impossible to grab a defensive rebound, throw it the length of the court towards your own basket, and then catch it before it came down.

It makes perfect sense to point out the incorrect language, but when otherwise intelligent officials act confused with the intent of question just to make a point, it makes the entire thread more confusing.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Do you still beat your wife? Do you really want to answer that?

Answer: "No, Never have."

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

...
It makes perfect sense to point out the incorrect language, but when otherwise intelligent officials act confused with the intent of question just to make a point, it makes the entire thread more confusing.
...

You mean like relabeling time-outs as an "extended stoppage of play"?

Who would do that?

[HokiePaul]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

You mean like relabeling time-outs as an "extended stoppage of play"?

Who would do that?

I'm probably missing the point of your post ... I wouldn't relabel anything.

I'm just saying that it was clear to me if you read the whole post that
1) The OP was confused with the use of "own goal" in NFHS (and other) rules
2) The OP was asking about a situations involving shooting at the wrong goal

[Rich1]

1) Since this was posted in a basketball forum and not a language arts forum it seems odd that so much of this discussion has centered on how the OP was written rather than answering the questions intended by the OP, which if not "crystal" clear was at least "reasonably" clear enough based on simple context clues for us to have a basketball discussion.

2) If it really bothered some posters that much, why hasn't someone edited it for Afrosheen so that it would be 100% clear what was being asked and we could focus on basketball. I see posts all the time that say "there, I edited it for you" so maybe someone could do that.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

We knew what he meant based on the title and the 2nd scenario.

Does "we" include everybody?

Originally Posted by bballref3966

The OP's situation described the player shooting at his "own basket," which would be a try.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Does "we" include everybody?

Whether one, or two, people misread a post doesn't detract from its clarity. Obviously, the OP used incorrect terminology, but looking at the OP now, it's also clear what was meant. Also, given that we know many think of "own goal" as scoring for the other team (even FIBA labels the baskets that way in basketball), and the fact that most of us here know this, it's important to read the substance of a post instead of just the headlines.

Let it go.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Adam

Whether one, or two, people misread a post doesn't detract from its clarity. Obviously, the OP used incorrect terminology, but looking at the OP now, it's also clear what was meant. Also, given that we know many think of "own goal" as scoring for the other team (even FIBA labels the baskets that way in basketball), and the fact that most of us here know this, it's important to read the substance of a post instead of just the headlines.

Let it go.

Also, did anyone notice in the three pages worth of responses that none of them has come from the person who posted the plays? My guess is (s)he got frustrated with three pages worth of nitpicking over the terminology and gave up.

I get it. We need to use correct terminology. However it would've been easy enough to just answer the question as it was meant given the title of the thread is Shooting at the wrong basket case plays then say, "by the way..."

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

... it's also clear what was meant.

Agree, but still believe that "clear" is a very strong word, especially when it could have been much clearer if the title matched the actual post. Note that I chose not to answer the post. I didn't want to post answers based on what was "meant" rather than what was posted, and then have astute Forum members tell me that I was wrong (as Kansas Ref alluded to above) because a player can be in the act of shooting at his own basket (see bballref3966's post above). To me, it just wasn't worth getting involved with the confusion. And by confusion, I am not talking about the original post (although I believe that the wording of the title combined with the actual post could be construed to be confusing), rather, I'm talking about the followup answers.

Originally Posted by Adam

... it's important to read the substance of a post instead of just the headlines.

Actually, in this case, the headline (title) had more substance, and clarity, than the actual post.