[crosscountry55]

The preventative officiating stunk here. While we’re not sure of the time in the 4th period, the “announcers” were talking about black needing to give two more fouls. So if they could tell what was going on, why couldn’t the crew? There are times for calling the touch foul when the offending team clearly wants that call. This was one of those times. On top of that, if the calling official senses the brewing animosity and runs toward the players, it probably prevents the ball shove.

That commentary notwithstanding, I think option D) is correct by rule given what actually occurred. I’ve got a DF (with one element being intentional*) followed by the unsporting T on black.

* In NFHS, there are still no FTs when part of a DF is of higher severity. NCAA (I think both M and W) call for the penalty assessment to proceed as if the lesser foul had not occurred (even though it is still charged). But no such rule in NFHS; it’s just POI.

Reasonable officials could disagree here on DF vs. FDF. For example, I like Raymond’s FDF solution and then ignore the ball shove. The end result seems the most just in that case: Black gets White closer to the bonus as they wanted, but first Black will shoot two and get the ball for White’s buffoonery.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk