Basket Interference with unintended advantage.

[Adam]

A wants to miss a free throw, B wants them to make it. We've had the discussion a few times about repeated lane violations.

What if B skips the lane violation and simply commits BI?

[just another ref]

If he's quick enough to commit BI on a free throw which was deliberately missed without violating, I say he deserves whatever benefits go with it.

[justacoach]

Wasn't there a weird sitch in an NCAAM game a few years back game with unintended consequences, like a TF?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by justacoach

Wasn't there a weird sitch in an NCAAM game a few years back game with unintended consequences, like a TF?

Goal tending on a free throw is a technical foul. Basket Interference is not.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

If he's quick enough to commit BI on a free throw which was deliberately missed without violating, I say he deserves whatever benefits go with it.

Why "without violating?"

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Adam

Why "without violating?"

A deliberate miss is usually a hard line drive that may not even enter the cylinder, and if it does, only briefly. One would have to be quick to enter after the release and get a hand in there.

[Adam]

All he needs to do is be grabbing the net when it hits the rim.

What difference does it make if he committed a free throw violation in the process?

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Adam

Goal tending on a free throw is a technical foul. Basket Interference is not.

I'd likely go with the T, anyway. NFHS 10-3-6 says unsporting acts are "not limited to" the list of items, which includes goaltending a free throw. I'd submit that would include BI, as well. If nothing else, it's certainly an unsporting act, given the reason.

[Raymond]

what if the free throw shooter jumps in the air and commits a flagrant foul before the basket interference.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Adam

All he needs to do is be grabbing the net when it hits the rim.

Would you consider a line drive throw which hits the front of the rim to be "on or within" the basket?

What difference does it make if he committed a free throw violation in the process?

*crickets*

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by Adam

All he needs to do is be grabbing the net when it hits the rim.

What difference does it make if he committed a free throw violation in the process?

I could be wrong - but i think he meant as long as the free throw shooter didn't violate. Not, the BI guy.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

I could be wrong - but i think he meant as long as the free throw shooter didn't violate. Not, the BI guy.

Nope, for some reason I was thinking the BI wouldn't count if there was a free throw violation first. I was thinking....... You see, it was like this...... I......



Oh, what a tangled web we weave.....

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Nope, for some reason I was thinking the BI wouldn't count if there was a free throw violation first. I was thinking....... You see, it was like this...... I......



Oh, what a tangled web we weave.....

I was hoping you would say, "Yeh, that's the ticket".

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

what if the free throw shooter jumps in the air and commits a flagrant foul before the basket interference.

Not fair... I was eating when I read this.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bainsey

I'd likely go with the T, anyway. NFHS 10-3-6 says unsporting acts are "not limited to" the list of items, which includes goaltending a free throw. I'd submit that would include BI, as well. If nothing else, it's certainly an unsporting act, given the reason.

Not really. BI on a FT can be a natural and inadvertent result of trying to rebound the FT attempt too early. GT a FT is never a natural result of playing the FT.