[wanja]

My rules study group struggled with a fasle double foul question. Here's an attempt at clarification that I have not presented yet. Any thoughts?


***

During our review of the rule 4 practice test, we deferred discussing a question related to Rule 4.19.9, false double fouls. Let’s look at the rule, an explanation, some related cases and then get back to the question.

Rule 4.19.8 . . . Double fouls:

a. A double personal foul is a situation in which two opponents commit personal fouls against each other at approximately the same time.
b. A double technical foul is a situation in which two opponents commit technical fouls against each other at approximately the same time.

Rule 4.19.9 False double fouls
A false double foul is a situation in which there are fouls by both teams, the second of which occurs before the clock is started following the first, and such that at least one of the attributes of a double foul is absent.


My notes:

A key to the false double foul is a second foul occurring before the clock starts after the first foul. Prior to the first foul, the clock could be started or not, the ball could be dead or live. When the first foul occurs, the ball becomes dead and the clock will stop. However, the ball will become live before the clock starts per rule 6.1 which identifies the three ways a ball becomes live (jump ball release, free throw disposal, throw in disposal).

Thus a false double fall could involve personal fouls (live ball or airborne shooter, contact) or technical fouls.


Cases (from 2006-2007 case book): 4.19.9a,b,c

Modified Question from 2004 NFHS Test Part 2:

Following a false double foul, the ball is put in play with a throw-in under the point of interruption method if the last foul was a double personal foul.*

Correct answer is True. Remember that fouls are administered in the order in which they occur and the last foul was a double foul. Please refer to rule 4.36 and be aware that the point of interruption method may result in a free throw or a throw in (including an alternating possession throw in).

*Because the point of interruption rule (4.36) was introduced in 2005-2006, the question is modified to replace “alternating possession procedure” with “point of interruption method”.