Spot Throw-in or run the endline?
 

The following was asked by an official, last night, at a training session - HS JV/V games:

Team A is in the bonus, team B is not.
A1 is at the line to shoot a 1 and 1. The first shot is successful, and during attempted rebounding action, a foul is called on A2.
The lane is cleared, and A1 shoots the second freethrow. If it is successful, will the throw-in by team B be a spot throw-in, or may they run the endline?

Run.

See 7.5.7B (it's kind of the "opposite" play so apply the "opposite" ruling).

See 8.6.3A

Maybe some others

My first question would be... is the foul during the successful free throw count? My initial thought is that the foul is ignored, unless it is flagrant. Therefore the rest of the scenario doesn't matter.

However, if the foul is not ignored, and the result carried out as you explain, then I'd say "no, the throw-in is in response to the foul, and therefore it is a spot throw-in."

Now that bob has answered the initial question, I have to ask:

Why would it be ignored? Is the ball dead during a free throw?

No. I guess the old rule on when players can enter the lane has me confused, because up until the change the free throw would have been made before there was even a chance for a foul. This year though, since players can enter upon the release, fouls can certainly happen before the ball goes into the basket.

As you pointed out, the ball is live, so the foul counts.

So what about the 2nd part, then? Is Team B's ability to run the baseline contingent on whether the second free throw is successful? Because if Team B is given the throw-in due to the foul, then that should be a spot throw-in.

If A's FT is successful, B can run the endline (bob provided the references above).

I don't have the rule book in front of me. It's actually in the bathroom as I read it during my "breaks". I try to answer questions here from memory, which sometimes fails me.

Thanks for the answer.

It would be an interesting strategy to intentionally miss the last free throw knowing you have the arrow. Especially late in a game where possession was more important than the 1 point.

Fouls were possible before, just less likely. Players in adjacent spaces could have easily fouled each other without violating the FT provisions. Players not along the lane could have also fouled each other. Not being able to go into the lane under the old rule just reduced the probability of it happening.

Honestly, I've found that's a better way for me to learn. Answer from memory and then check to see if I'm right. I've also found, though, that I put myself at risk of getting answers wrong (less so now than I used to) when I do that, so it results in a few more posts to the effect of, "Yep, you're right, thanks."

We all learn differently.

Twist And Shout ...
 

This situation can be changed up a little. Maybe the foul on A2 was Team A's seventh foul of the half and now Team B is in the bonus. How do you like those potatoes?

That makes it easier, IMO.

I agree. A lot less explaining to the coaches.

Another reason to eliminate AP and return to Jump Balls put the ball back into play. Billy, are you reading this, :p.

MTD, Sr.

The ball is already in flight for this case play, so that would be kinda hard to do. ;)

But anyway, it is no different than any other time a double foul is called while a field goal is in flight.

Thanks, bob. My response to the official was the same. And I told the several officials present, that I'd check here to be sure.
And thanks for the discussion, to all who responded. The secondary scenario, with Team B being in the bonus, was also discussed, and is simpler to answer.
The pre-season tourney that we use for training is showing some good progress on the part of the newer officials involved, thanks to the involvement of some of our Board members as evaluators. It's always good to give back to an activity that has given us so much enjoyment over the years.

Two Words ...
 

Yes. And, shut up.

LOL!

MTD, Sr.

Maybe I am not getting the OP. What I was getting at was the foul happened on the front end of a 1-1. This was made and would clear the lane for the second try. Depending on whether it was made or missed would determine the resumption of play. If the offending team knew it had the arrow they could intentionally miss the second try and get the ball back. In a late game situation it could be more profitable to have the ball instead of the 1 point.

I think you are misunderstanding the case play (8.6.3A) or the rule.

On a double foul, we go to POI. If the double foul happens before the FT, then the FT is the POI, and play continues with either a rebound (missed FT) or a throw-in by B (made FT). No advantage to missing on purpose.

If it happens after the FT is released, the if the FT is good, B gets the throw-in. We go to the arrow if the FT is missed, because we don't know who would get the rebound. So, for this tactic to work, A1 has to miss the FT AND A2 has to entice B2 into a double foul. The odds of that are small -- the team is better off with the FT (plus the opportunity to rebound if the FT is missed). I suppose if A1 was a 10% FT shooter, and B will get 90% of the rebounds, that it might be the better choice.

Agreed. There are so many factors in play that have to go perfectly (including the officials calling a double foul rather than penalizing the first action) that isn't not a viable tactic to even try.

B gets the ball either way, whether it's made or not simply determines whether B gets an endline throw in or a spot throw in.