[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

REMEMBER- you said in all these instances that B1 and B2 committed a foul at approximately the same time. In this case it gives you the leeway to choose

And, as I mentioned before, I don't believe in ties, so the word "approximately" still means one happened before the other. My choice would (most often) be the player that fouled first.

Originally Posted by btaylor64

I have had the foul on the mouthy player before, unless of course the other player raises his hand, wanting to take the foul.

What if the player that raises his hand is simply trying to influence your decision in giving him the foul instead on the "star"? How would that be different than the higher % shooter walking to the FT line if there is some confusion as to which player got fouled?

Originally Posted by btaylor64

Can't really say what i would do in the 2nd instance.

Boy, this game's taking a long time while we stand around waiting for your decision...

Originally Posted by btaylor64

No i don't check the fouls. if i know, then i can make a decision if i don't then i just pick one.

Coin flip? Rock, paper, scissors? Why not make the decision based on who fouled first?

Originally Posted by btaylor64

I'm not ignoring illegal contact or my signature. Illegal contact was committed and i called the foul. I did not ignore any illegal actions. In my league there are no "false multiple" fouls.

However, if you call the foul on the "sub", instead of the "star", and it was the star that fouled first, then yes, by rule, you are both ignoring the illegal contact/foul, AND calling a foul on a player that didn't commit one. (If you are not calling a multiple or false multiple foul, then the second contact is ignored unless intentional or flagrant.)

I was simply responding to your statement:

Originally Posted by btaylor64

That is the perfect situation to give the foul to the player with fewer fouls or the one that can have the least amount of impact on the game.

In rare instances, I can see doing this, but not as a blanket statement that all officials should follow every time. I would prefer to give the foul to the player that committed the foul.

Remember, there are no ties (just like baseball), so one happened before the other. Perhaps the second foul was harder, so you rule the first contact incidental. That's fine. But I can't find any rule, case, mention in the "Simplified and Illustrated", NCAA memo, or note from any of my assignors mentioing your philosophy. It sounds a lot like making the "least objectionable call" instead of the right call. Maybe in rare instances that can be done, but never as a common occurance.