[Nevadaref]

Jeff,
While it is not defined in the book, I've always understood a simultaneous violation to be two players committing violations at approximately the same time, and a double violation was two opponents violating one after the other.
In the first case, you really couldn't say which happened first, but in the second we are sure that one preceded the other.

Personally, I don't agree with the term used in 6.4.3, I believe that should be called a double violation. Both are penalized though, since both were not by players in marked lane spaces.
9.1.6 has it correct, imo.


As for your question, "If, for example, 9.1.6 Situation A were stipulated to take place during the first of two free-throws, would the ruling then be, following 6.4.3 Situation B, " . . . play resumes with an alternating possession throw-in from a designated spot outside the end line." "

The answer is no. You simply cancel the first FT due to the double violation and then administer the second FT as normal.

The Penalty section of 9-1 instructs us to do it this way as 4b refers back to 3.

"3. If there is a simultaneous violation by each team, the ball becomes dead and no point can be scored. Remaining free throws are administered or play is resumed by the team entitled to the alternating-possession throw-in from the designated out-of-bounds spot nearest to where the simultaneous violation occurred.
4. If there is a violation first by the free-thrower's opponent followed by the free thrower or a teammate:

a. If both offenders are in a marked lane-space, the second violation is ignored, as in penalty item (2).
b. If the second violation is by the free thrower or a teammate behind the free-throw line extended and the three-point line, both violations are penalized, as in penalty item (3).
c. If a violation by the free thrower follows disconcertion by an opponent, a substitute free throw shall be awarded.
d. If a fake by an opponent causes a teammate of the free thrower to violate, only the fake is penalized."