BI during a free throw
 

Suppose A1 is shooting a free throw and the ball is to become dead when the try ends. During the free throw, (a) A1 or (b) B1 commits a basket interference violation.

If the violation is committed by B1, obviously Team A will be awarded one point. However, how will we put the ball in play following any remaining free throws? Will it simply be according to the penalty for the free throw(s) during which the violation occurred, or does the penalty for a violation during a free throw supplant the resumption of play following a series of free throws according to 8-5 and 8-6?

The penalty of either not scoring (BI by A2) or awarding points (BI by B1) and then proceed as required because the Ball is to become Dead after the FTA ends.

MTD, Sr.

What do you mean by "then proceed as required"?

You continue to the next FT after awarding/canceling the shot as if the shot had been made/missed as in any other FT. BI never has any other consequence other than counting/canceling the score.

9-12 Penalty 1 confirms what you are saying, but only with respect to defensive basket interference. 9-12 Penalty 2 specifically awards a designated-spot throw-in to the opponents of a team whose player has committed an offensive basket interference violation.

Only if there is no other FT to follow (the rebound is to remain in play).

In the case presented, the ball was to become dead whether the shot is made or missed. In that case, the BI penalty ends with the awarding or canceling of the shot. Whatever was to follow (another FT, a throw in, or an intermission) occurs as if the shot had just been missed.

I believe you, but do you have a rule citation to back this up?

Good job, keep pressing until you are given a clear answer with accompanying rule support.

You may also wish to inquire about simultaneous BI by both teams, excessive elbow swinging by B1, or a foul by B3, all during the first of two FTs. You are going to learn much (and so will some other forum members) if you keep asking these type of questions.

It is between rule 1 and 10.

But, seriously, there really isn't a reason for BI to occur on a FT that can't be rebounded. So, the rule you're citing wasn't really written with that in mind any more than it was written with the possibility of the lights going out with the ball in flight such that you can't see if it went in or not.

If you want a more specific rule, spend some time in the book and understanding the context of the rules and you'll eventually find it.

I was kinda thinking that the whole time myself. Like, "how is that possible?" I suppose it is under two circumstances:

1. Not the last throw of a multiple throw with players in the lane. If A commits, FT ends, no score awarded, A1 gets his second (or third) throw. If B commits, award the score, and A1 gets his second (or third) throw.

2. A throw without players in the lane. A cannot commit because it would have clearly been preceded by a FT violation which would have caused the ball to become dead immediately (no score). If B commits, we've got a delayed violation signal that precedes it, but that has no bearing once BI occurs because that causes the ball to become dead. Award the score, and then either A1 gets another FT if entitled or you move on to whatever you would have after the lane-cleared throws.

All of this being said, the potential for this is exceedingly low. If anyone ever sees it, I want to see the video IOT laugh at the stupidity of the violator. :p

Not quite. Either A or B can commit BI without committing a FT violation. But, it is even more unlikely.....

A1 shoots the FT, the ball hits the rim, rolls around for a while before falling in/out. However, once the ball hit the rim, either A2 or B2 runs in from outside and touches the basket/ball before it falls in/out.

That is exceedingly unlikely (probably never happened in the history of modern basketball) and i'll buy dinner for the first person to see it occur in the wild (you could always fake it for YouTube).