How many seconds on the free throw line?

Welcome to What's Bev Got To Do With It?. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Pages:
1
2
3

How many seconds on the free throw line?
Topic Started: Oct 24 2009, 10:43 PM (1,798 Views)
Saintpat	Oct 24 2009, 10:43 PM Post #1
Franchise Player Posts: 2,922 Group: Member Member #49 Joined: July 11, 2006	Can someone confirm what the rule is on time taken to shoot a free throw- I thought the player had to shoot within 5 seconds of the receivng the ball- I'm obviously wrong, because I counted to 8 or 9 secoinds on at least 8 occasions when Raiders went to the line. Someone please clarify the rule- thanks.



hustle	Oct 24 2009, 10:46 PM Post #2
All Star legend Posts: 239 Group: Member Member #10,053 Joined: January 16, 2009	After ten seconds, it is considered a delay of game warning. After the next infraction, a technical foul will be given to the team, You have ten seconds from the time the referee puts the ball in play to the foul shooter.



Sam_H	Oct 24 2009, 11:44 PM Post #3
Franchise Player Posts: 3,146 Group: Moderator Member #78 Joined: July 13, 2006	I always thought it was officially 10 seconds, unofficially as long as you want because the migs never have the balls to pick you up on something so trivial.



Hustler2	Oct 25 2009, 03:35 AM Post #4
Rookie Posts: 38 Group: Member Member #10,073 Joined: January 29, 2009	You win by 20 and still find something petty to complain about



AP88	Oct 25 2009, 03:47 AM Post #5
Rookie Posts: 64 Group: Member Member #8,631 Joined: May 2, 2008	Would tend to agree with you saintpat. I always thought it was 5 seconds, or as long as he MIG's wanted to let you have it for.



hustle	Oct 25 2009, 09:21 AM Post #6
All Star legend Posts: 239 Group: Member Member #10,053 Joined: January 16, 2009	Again, it's 10 seconds it is also one of many little rules that never gets called



skipskap	Oct 25 2009, 09:39 AM Post #7
Bench Player Posts: 110 Group: Member Member #399 Joined: August 2, 2006	It is actually 5 seconds. FIBA Rule 42.2.3 A player shall: � Release the ball within five (5) seconds of the time when it is placed at his disposal by the official. Clearly a rule that is constantly overlooked. To be honest I don't see a problem with it. Also can't see how an infraction can be punished as a 'delay of game' as the clock is stopped during free throws?



retsek	Oct 25 2009, 09:52 AM Post #8
Global Moderator Posts: 1,124 Group: Member Member #303 Joined: July 24, 2006	I always used to worry about a ref calling that against Stirl when he played for us, and I'm fairly sure he did get warned about it at least once but never actually penalised.
	"Good offense will ALWAYS beat good defence" - George Gervin


booooom	Oct 26 2009, 02:41 PM Post #9
Bench Player Posts: 163 Group: Member Member #36 Joined: July 10, 2006	There's a limit in force so it can be used if needed, i.e. players are taking the pi$$. There's no 'defence' preventing the shot going up, like there is defence trying to stop an inbounds pass (also 5 second limit) which is why 5 seconds on an inbounds pass is enforced, i.e. the defence has earned the violation call. So if someone's foul shot ritual (bounce pause bounce kiss the ball bounce shoot) comes to 6 seconds, who cares....



Saintpat	Oct 26 2009, 10:44 PM Post #10
Franchise Player Posts: 2,922 Group: Member Member #49 Joined: July 11, 2006	Quote: So if someone's foul shot ritual (bounce pause bounce kiss the ball bounce shoot) comes to 6 seconds, who cares.... If it was 6 seconds I doubt I would even have noticed. It was at least 8 seconds every time and generally more. And I'm sorry- but it's a rule!!!! Remove it from the effing rules if no one ever uses it. Refs seem mightily concerned about players having their shirts tucked in and continually stop play to enforce that particularly ludicrous rule- and 'who cares' whether their shirts are tucked in or not? The 5 second rule is there for a reason- a player taking twice that amount of time to take his free throw is gaining an advantage- far more of an advantage than not having his shirt tucked in!!!!



Sam_H	Oct 27 2009, 12:16 AM Post #11
Franchise Player Posts: 3,146 Group: Moderator Member #78 Joined: July 13, 2006	Im surprised to see its 5 seconds - must be the NBA that its 10, or posisbly the rule has changed as I recall reading that it was 10 a long time ago. I have never once seen it called though, nor in NBA games. Some players do take ages but 5 seconds isn't that long really and if it was called religiously you'd get more players missing as their mind would be on the time to shoot rather than 100% focussed on making the free throw. I think the fact its never called gives players peace of mind and they don't worry about that. I expect the rule is there to stop someone taking the pi$$ and being up there for say, 20 seconds. Someone might do that to give the coach a chance to talk to one of the other players for example. I think if they were blatantly wasting time, then the mig would call it but thats all its there for. With that in mind I believe 10 seconds should be the official time as 5 is pretty short for someone who likes to bounce the ball and spin it in their hands a few times and 'settle in' to the shot.



Hustler2	Oct 27 2009, 05:13 AM Post #12
Rookie Posts: 38 Group: Member Member #10,073 Joined: January 29, 2009	As someone else has said, How can they be wasting time if the clock is stopped.........different story if the clock was still running down Like the shirts, waste of time a stupid petty rule GET RID



dave f	Oct 27 2009, 09:18 AM Post #13
All-Star Posts: 2,337 Group: Member Member #266 Joined: July 21, 2006	Yep thats a good idea then coaches will be having mini timeouts on the sideline as their shooter goes through a Jonny wilkinson style routine before each shot and the game will reduce to a crawl. The rule needs to be there and it shuold be enforced like the three second rule (ie when the player is taking the micky not at the stroke of the 3rd second). The time only starts when teh player gets the ball so if he is nto ready to shoot it within the time he should stand back from the line. Incidentally its one of the things the GB fans got into in Poland when Gasol was on the line. We were regularly counting up to 13 before he shot it at the top of our voice.



oldandgrey	Oct 27 2009, 10:00 AM Post #14
Rookie Posts: 53 Group: Member Member #10,223 Joined: March 31, 2009	Are we being serious here? Are you seriously suggesting that, a player having been fouled and therefore entitled to shoot free throws as a result of illegal play by the opposition, should have that advantage wiped if he takes 5.2secs to release the ball? Stop it!! I know what the rule says, but like a previous response, it needs common sense (a la the 3 second rule) otherwise illegal defence could be rewarded surely!? I'm sure if the referees thought the offensive coach (or players for that matter) were gaining, or attempting to gain, a deliberate advantage from the action they would deal with it. Clearly that's not the case...& hasn't ever been the case in any game I've played in, coached in, watched or refereed in nearly 30 years of basketball. Come on now Pat...if you want people to take your views on the game seriously and if you want you rose-tinted referee views to carry weight, then at least pick on stuff that matters, not absolute irrelevancies!



Saintpat	Oct 27 2009, 11:18 AM Post #15
Franchise Player Posts: 2,922 Group: Member Member #49 Joined: July 11, 2006	As Dave says, if the player is not ready, he doesn't need to accept the ball. 5 seconds seems an acceptable length of time to ready yourself and take a shot to me. It's in general at least 4 seconds quicker than if you were shooting a field goal. And I'm not suggesting a short time after 5 seconds, but 8 seconds or above is too many. If it's a rule it's not an irrelevance- shirts untucked are apparently not an irrelevance so why is this? An illegal defence is often rewarded- Foul a poor free throw shooter when shooting and you are likely to gain an advantage of at least 1 point. And fouling near the end of the game is also illegal defence being rewarded. Insisting that a player takes 5 seconds to shoot a basketball is not rewarding the illegal defence.



Old Russellian	Oct 27 2009, 02:03 PM Post #16
Starter Posts: 591 Group: Member Member #1,327 Joined: January 16, 2007	I see no problem as long the shot is made before the 10 second cry extolls from the merry band of attendant Lions fans, lest we be subjected to the mad rush of shoe and sock removal. Edited by Old Russellian, Oct 27 2009, 02:14 PM.



oldandgrey	Oct 27 2009, 04:43 PM Post #17
Rookie Posts: 53 Group: Member Member #10,223 Joined: March 31, 2009	But if we accept ALL the rules are not irrelevancies then we will have a very stop-start game. That infers 3 second calls on the button every play virtually. It infers a carry every time an American point guard dribbles. It infers that the player inbounding a ball after his team has been scored on, that stands on one leg to do it (thereby not grounding both feet out of court) should be penalised. So, I think my point is justified...let's worry about things that affect the game and leave the rest



britball	Oct 27 2009, 04:50 PM Post #18
Bench Player Posts: 151 Group: Member Member #493 Joined: August 12, 2006	The rules are the rules, who are we to determine which ones can be deemed irrelevant and minor. What makes this any more irrelevant than 3 seconds or giving a technical for questioning a call? Like davef points out this could be used to gain an advanteage and basically an extra time out. I understand common sense must be used and the referees should issue a warning but if a player uses twice the allocated time then it must be addresses.



Della	Oct 27 2009, 04:59 PM Post #19
Starter Posts: 810 Group: Moderator Member #6 Joined: July 7, 2006	If a player is gaining an advantage by taking longer to shoot then surely it is an issue. Some players who are perfectly capable of scoring seem to have problems with freethrows (Jayson Obazuaye?). Would it be fair for these players to be given extra time to shoot? If the rule is 5 seconds why should it be ignored? No one is suggesting the referees stand next to the player obviously counting to 5, but when a player consitently takes 8 or 9 seconds then why isn't something said?



oldandgrey	Oct 28 2009, 09:43 AM Post #20
Rookie Posts: 53 Group: Member Member #10,223 Joined: March 31, 2009	Della Oct 27 2009, 04:59 PM If a player is gaining an advantage by taking longer to shoot then surely it is an issue. Some players who are perfectly capable of scoring seem to have problems with freethrows (Jayson Obazuaye?). Would it be fair for these players to be given extra time to shoot? If the rule is 5 seconds why should it be ignored? No one is suggesting the referees stand next to the player obviously counting to 5, but when a player consitently takes 8 or 9 seconds then why isn't something said? So rules are rules and must therefore be adhered to...I stand corrected by the majority on that point. For the remainder of the season I shall take my pillow and sleeping bag to each game and watch as the 5 hour drama of carry, travel, 3 seconds, 5 seconds etc. etc. is played out before my disbelieving eyes...I shall then come on these boards and howl with laughter at the abuse thrown out at the officials "We came to watch them play not you ref" "Did you swallow a rule book?" "Let 'em play ref" ad nauseum Of course I shall leave home early to get to the game...just in case I do 71mph on the motorway and some eagle-eyed gendarmerie spots me and does me for exceeding the rules of the road. After all, we can't have any give and take or common sense, rules are rules!!!



Hustler2	Oct 28 2009, 10:14 AM Post #21
Rookie Posts: 38 Group: Member Member #10,073 Joined: January 29, 2009	oldandgrey...........



Saintpat	Oct 28 2009, 10:30 AM Post #22
Franchise Player Posts: 2,922 Group: Member Member #49 Joined: July 11, 2006	Going by oldandgreys thoughts, we should also ignore the 5 second inbound rule, after all the clock doesn't start running until the ball is touched by a player on court, why shouldn't the player have much time as possible to inbound the ball?. We can also ignore the 24 second call, because what's the point?



Old Russellian	Oct 28 2009, 01:47 PM Post #23
Starter Posts: 591 Group: Member Member #1,327 Joined: January 16, 2007	Actually Pat, I think oldandgrey was saying that common sense should prevail ?



SEB	Oct 28 2009, 02:08 PM Post #24
Sixth Man Posts: 447 Group: Member Member #241 Joined: July 20, 2006	Oldandgrey is spot on with everything he's been saying...I just never said it myself cos I knew he was fighting a losing battle trying to convince people! Years ago as a young refereee I reffed our U14s waxing some other U14s by 30+. The opposition were poor and travelled most times they caught the ball. Our kids, on the other hand, were England players. I called a travel on one of our England players for a small shuffle (cos he should know better!) and let most (unless it was gaining an advantage) of the opposition's go. Then, with about 3 minutes to go our team put on one of our beginners who danced every time he caught the ball just like the opposition: the opposition coach went crazy shouting "travel!!!". I (rather naively) said to him, "look we both know your teams footwork is terrible..." before he interrupted me to say how unprofessional that was. He said every travel should be called no matter what. In the last 2 minutes I called 9 travels on his team and 2 on ours. I think only one basket was scored in that time and got booed by the parents about "letting the kids play". Given the example above Saintpat, do you think the way I refereed it for the first 38 mins was right, or the last 2? I know there are differences with these being kids, but I still think it highlights that referees should have a feel for the game in their calls and not just call to the letter.



britball	Oct 28 2009, 03:11 PM Post #25
Bench Player Posts: 151 Group: Member Member #493 Joined: August 12, 2006	seb you know that this is very different to the situation st pat is talking about. However, In reference to your arguement a professional player in the bbl 'should know better' than taking twice the allocated time to shoot a free throw!



1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General BBL · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
2
3