Most bizarre one that I've ever had

[Nevadaref]

Last night I was Trail and observing the dribbler and his guard right in front of the visiting bench. The dribbler tries to go past him on the sideline and the guard extends his leg into the path and knocks him to the floor. I the whistle for what I think is a simple foul. At this time I hear my partner's voice from the C say "double foul." I turn to look at him, wondering this play could possibly be that. We meet in the vertical third of the court and he tells me that he has two knuckleheads on the other side of the FT lane causing a problem and they are the two players that he is penalizing. His whistle sounded AT THE SAME TIME as mine and neither of us heard the other!

I can't just ignore the foul that I've called as the dribbler got knocked off his feet right in front of his coach. So we discuss for a bit and decide that we have a simultaneous foul which is made up of a double personal foul and a common personal foul. We are going to penalize all three players.

We awarded no FTs, charged each of the three players with personal fouls, and added one team foul to the offense and two to the defense. These were team fouls 7 and 8 for the defense and 9 for the offense in that half. We then resumed with a POI throw-in for the offense from nearest to where the dribbler was fouled, basically right in front of the coach.

Both coaches were fine with the explanation. That surprised me.

So #1 do people think that we handled it correctly?
#2 on the way home my partner asked what would have happened had his foul not been a double foul, but instead had only been against the defensive player.

I wasn't sure how to administer it. Since both fouls happened simultaneously we can't ignore either one. I surmised that it would constitute a False Multiple Foul because although only one team fouled the fouls were not committed against the same opponent. Thus both fouls would carry their full penalty. In this case (team fouls 7&8) that would mean awarding the 1-and-1 to each fouled player. What I don't know is which player should attempt his FTs first with the lane cleared and which should shoot with players in the spaces? My partner wondered if each player didn't receive one FT similar to the penalty for a true multiple foul. Perhaps, but that doesn't seem right to me, since this doesn't fully meet the definition of a multiple foul and the case book has a play for a FMF that instructs the officials to award the full penalty for each foul.

Followup question: What if these were team fouls 6&7? Now which player shoots the bonus and which doesn't?

I really don't know and felt that the actual situation was bizarre enough as it was.

Anyone have any ideas?

[bob jenkins]

Just like with the "foul and violation at teh same time" case play, you need to decide which occured first. Did one of you delay the whistle a little bit, to see if the player coul play through the foul?

[rainmaker]

Nevada, I understand not giving shots for the double foul, but I don't understand giving no FT's for the tripping-the-dribbler thing. Why not?

Okay, I just looked it up. I guess that's the rule, but I don't like it. But if the off-ball offensive part of the double foul hadn't happened, then it would be multiple and they'd get some shots. So, the dribbler can yell at his teammate if he's upset.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Juulie, your instincts were correct on this one. By definition, simultaneous fouls are false double fouls, and Nevada's play was a good example of a false double foul which is not what I would consider a typical simultaneous foul.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. In the ancient days, if Team A was in the bonus due to the foul by B1 against A1 (the foul by the sideline) A1 would have shot his free throws with no one lined up on the free throw lane, and then the ball would have been put back into play by a jump ball in the center circle by any two opponents. Ah, those were the good old days.


P.S.S. Not only is this foul sequence a false double foul it is a false mutliple foul too.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

By definition, simultaneous fouls are false double fouls

A false double foul is when two opponents foul each other but not at the same time. A simultaneous foul is when two opponents commit fouls at the same time, but NOT against each other.

In other words, simultaneous fouls are nothing like false double fouls. I think you just mis-spoke here.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

By definition, simultaneous fouls are false double fouls,

By definition(4-19-10), simultaneous fouls are simultaneous fouls. Also by definition(4-19-9), false double fouls are false double fouls.

A horse is a horse, of course, of course......

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

By definition(4-19-10), simultaneous fouls are simultaneous fouls. Also by definition(4-19-9), false double fouls are false double fouls.

A horse is a horse, of course, of course......

JR:

Come on, you remember the Ancient Days. By definition and by casebook plays, simultaneous fouls have always been a false double fouls. The only think that changed a couple of years back is that the Rules Committees decided that the penalty for a simultaneous fouls would be the same as a double persona foul or a double technical foul.

MTD, Sr.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

JR:

Come on, you remember the Ancient Days. By definition and by casebook plays, simultaneous fouls have always been a false double fouls. The only think that changed a couple of years back is that the Rules Committees decided that the penalty for a simultaneous fouls would be the same as a double persona foul or a double technical foul.

Mark, please cite those definitions and case book plays then. Afaik, simultaneous fouls have never been regarded as false double fouls. Simultaneous fouls have been regarded as simultaneous fouls....period. That's why there are separate definitions for each in the rule book.

The fouls making up a false double foul follow one other. Simultaneous fouls occur....well....simultaneously.

Another example......by definition, simultaneous fouls can NOT be committed by opponents against each other; in false double fouls, you can have opponents committing fouls against each other.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

We meet in the vertical third of the court.....
Anyone have any ideas?

I have an idea that I don't get out enough, because I have no idea where the vertical third of the court is.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I have an idea that I don't get out enough, because I have no idea where the vertical third of the court is.

Nope. You've got it backwards. The fact that you don't know what the vertical third of the court is proves that you have a life and don't spend all your time on basketball.

I believe you can visualize the vertical third of the court this way. Divide the court in thirds by extending the free throw lane lines from endline to opposite endline. The middle sections (containing both free throw lanes) is the "middle third" of the court.

You probably have to technically widen it slightly for most courts, since the lane is only 12' wide, but I think you get the idea.

[BillyMac]

From Scrapper1: I believe you can visualize the vertical third of the court this way. Divide the court in thirds by extending the free throw lane lines from endline to opposite endline. The middle sections (containing both free throw lanes) is the "middle third" of the court.

On our Board, we refer to these "thirds" as A, B, and C, in no specific order, and use this method to help visualize court coverage and primary coverage areas, as the ball moves from one "third" into another.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Nope. You've got it backwards. The fact that you don't know what the vertical third of the court is proves that you have a life and don't spend all your time on basketball.

I believe you can visualize the vertical third of the court this way. Divide the court in thirds by extending the free throw lane lines from endline to opposite endline. The middle sections (containing both free throw lanes) is the "middle third" of the court.

You probably have to technically widen it slightly for most courts, since the lane is only 12' wide, but I think you get the idea.

Now I get the idea that you have divided the court vertically into thirds, but I sorta had that idea already. So which one is "the vertical third?"