Does anyone know what the continuation rule says?

[samikeyp]

I know that depending on the player and ref it is called differently but does anyone know what the rule actually says?

Thanks.

[Obstructed_View]

A guy has to be in the act of shooting when he's fouled. It doesn't mention continuation specifically. The NBA ruled that Larry Johnson's four point play should not have been called continuation. By rule Lebron's shot would NOT have counted if they'd blown the whistle. That said, I saw Iverson get a couple of continuations that were just ridiculous, so the potential is there for a missed call or a bad judgment. Upon reflection, I've decided that the fact that the whistle was NOT blown is proof that they were not prepared to award continuation and wanted the game decided by James rather than a free throw contest.

[samikeyp]

So then I guess my questions is what cons utes the act of shooting?

I have see a player get hit, then take three steps and throw it in and the refs count it. Usually players named Bryant, James, Wade, etc.

[Obstructed_View]

Iverson got two in a single game in round 1 that were just amazingly bad calls. That doesn't mean everyone's going to get that same call. Three officials were watching Bowen and Lebron; they'd have blown the whistle if they were going to give him continuation, IMO.

[MadDog73]

A guy has to be in the act of shooting when he's fouled. It doesn't mention continuation specifically. The NBA ruled that Larry Johnson's four point play should not have been called continuation. By rule Lebron's shot would NOT have counted if they'd blown the whistle. That said, I saw Iverson get a couple of continuations that were just ridiculous, so the potential is there for a missed call or a bad judgment. Upon reflection, I've decided that the fact that the whistle was NOT blown is proof that they were not prepared to award continuation and wanted the game decided by James rather than a free throw contest.

As you pointed out in another thread, Spurs had a foul to give.

That's the last thing the refs wanted to do, call a foul, and then give the Cavs the ball out of bounds with 5 seconds left and a prayer.

[Obstructed_View]

As you pointed out in another thread, Spurs had a foul to give.

That's the last thing the refs wanted to do, call a foul, and then give the Cavs the ball out of bounds with 5 seconds left and a prayer.

Yeah, it wasn't a free throw situation, but the point that they didn't want to wave off a potentially game tying three is still there.

[Spurminator]

Continuation typically shortens considerably when the ref knows the intent is to foul before a shot. No way in would they have awarded continuation on that play.

[Obstructed_View]

Continuation typically shortens considerably when the ref knows the intent is to foul before a shot. No way in would they have awarded continuation on that play.

If not for the LJ play, I'd disagree. The officials aren't going to make the same mistake in a big game. No way do they award continuation, and the officials haven't been rewarding guys playing for the call very much. The lesson to the NBA should be to worry about making baskets and let the officials worry about blowing whistles.

[leemajors]

i was scared they would call it a foul if his shot had gone in, personally. doesn't make sense but i would not have been surprised at all.