Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac
If one doesn't catch the first foul, one might end up calling a double foul.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raymond
The first foul is on Blue for sticking his hand into White's chest ... Get the first foul, not the reaction to the first foul.
|
Agree.
But how "close" do the first foul and reactive contact have to be to consider a double personal foul instead of a single foul?
4-19-8-A: A double personal foul is a situation in which two opponents commit personal fouls against each other at approximately the same time.
Technically, the first foul creates a dead ball (the foul not the whistle), meaning that in order for the reactive contact to be a "foul" (and not ignored) it would have to be a dead ball technical intentional foul, or dead ball technical flagrant foul.
Can't be a double personal foul since both aren't personal. Can't be a double technical foul because both aren't technical. False double?
Ignore the reactive contact because it may not be intentional, or flagrant?
Interesting situation, more complicated than I initially thought. Thinking about it too much will eventually give me a headache.
Keeping it simple, in a real game, in real time, I'm leaning toward two possible interpretations.
In order of preference, single personal foul on Blue #2, or double personal foul on Blue #2 and White #24.
That's my story and I'm probably going to stick to it (until I change my mind).