FT Violation Quiz (Video)

[Freddy]

Quiz for Newbies . . .

Using visual clues evident in this video (FT Sitch) . . .



1. What violation did the official call?
2. Was the official correct to cancel the score?
3. How was the throw-in team determined?
4. What error did the official make?
Bonus: What rules reference prevails in this situation?

(Thanx to the Mysterious Embedder)

Originally Posted by Freddy

Quiz for Newbies . . .

Using visual clues evident in this video (FT Sitch) . . .

1. What violation did the official call?
2. Was the official correct to cancel the score?
3. How was the throw-in team determined?
4. What error did the official make?
Bonus: What rules reference prevails in this situation?

(PS - I don't get that whole "embed" thing...if someone thinks that's worthy of being "embedded", go right ahead)

Looks like a double violation to me Freddo. Cancel current FT and move to next one, if free throw is last in a series cancel free throw and go to the possession arrow POI.

[saluki34]

To me, it appears as if H1 caused V1 to violate (9.1.3.b).
This would cause the play to become dead immediately and the ball be given to V for a throw-in. (Penalty 9.1.a)

If you watch the video over and over, it looks like H1 & V1 come into the lane about the same time, but it is H1 that begins first, IMO, causing V1 to move.

1) It looks like the official called a double violation, which I don't agree with.
2) In either case, the score was correctly cancelled
3) In this case, the throw-in appears to be via AP, which if a double violation, is correct
4) I think the only error was made calling a double violation, I would have called the violation on H1 and given the ball to V for OOB throw-in.

Thoughts?

[JRutledge]

Can we even have a double violation on a FT with two lane line players?

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Can we even have a double violation on a FT with two lane line players?

Peace

Only in the rare case where you can't figure out who went in first.
I think this qualifies.

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Can we even have a double violation on a FT with two lane line players?

Peace

Why not? (Serious question.). If they both illegally go in at the same tine, what else would the call be?

Side question: when is a violation for joining the lane too late by a teammate of the shooter supposed to be called? I assumed immediately, but in my son's game (with what appeared to me to be trained but not experienced refs), the ref signaled when he went in, but waited for the shot to be taken before whistling the violation. Is that right? Could the team have bought its way out of that violation with a TO?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

Why not? (Serious question.). If they both illegally go in at the same tine, what else would the call be?

Side question: when is a violation for joining the lane too late by a teammate of the shooter supposed to be called? I assumed immediately, but in my son's game (with what appeared to me to be trained but not experienced refs), the ref signaled when he went in, but waited for the shot to be taken before whistling the violation. Is that right? Could the team have bought its way out of that violation with a TO?

As I envision the play, the violation should have been called immediately.

that said, there's often a brief delay as the official verifies that the violation is on the FT shooting team and not on the "defense."

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by saluki34

To me, it appears as if H1 caused V1 to violate (9.1.3.b).
This would cause the play to become dead immediately and the ball be given to V for a throw-in. (Penalty 9.1.a)

If you watch the video over and over, it looks like H1 & V1 come into the lane about the same time, but it is H1 that begins first, IMO, causing V1 to move.

1) It looks like the official called a double violation, which I don't agree with.
2) In either case, the score was correctly cancelled
3) In this case, the throw-in appears to be via AP, which if a double violation, is correct
4) I think the only error was made calling a double violation, I would have called the violation on H1 and given the ball to V for OOB throw-in.

Thoughts?

"Simultaneous" violation is the word in the book. H1 may have moved first but moving, itself, is not a violation. If it was a fake then you penalize the fake. Here white starts moving and V1 decides she doesnt approve and they go in at same time. Simultateously. no basket can be scored. if no other free throw go to arrow. 9-1 Penalty 3. The error was putting the ball in play on the oppostite side of the lane from where the players violated.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

Why not? (Serious question.). If they both illegally go in at the same tine, what else would the call be?

Side question: when is a violation for joining the lane too late by a teammate of the shooter supposed to be called? I assumed immediately, but in my son's game (with what appeared to me to be trained but not experienced refs), the ref signaled when he went in, but waited for the shot to be taken before whistling the violation. Is that right? Could the team have bought its way out of that violation with a TO?

1. Immediately.
2. No.