|
|||
One foul or two?
Last half-minute of overtime, A up three points, and in possession. I'm the T.
A-1 is holding the ball near the division line. B-2 runs toward him and tries to foul, blocking him. (The play on the ball was minimal, but enough to go common.) The instant my whistle ends, B-2 shoves A-1 down. I immediately opted for the intentional foul. Were there no shove, I would've stuck with a common foul. However, it could be argued to go with a common and a technical, for the dead ball contact. Thoughts?
__________________
Confidence is a vehicle, not a destination. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
I'd have gone common and then a technical here. This kind of play after a foul call is a two and you're outa here. Depending on the shove I may just get rid of the player then and there, but it would have to be pretty bad. |
|
|||
No. Here, it's intentional or common and technical.
__________________
Confidence is a vehicle, not a destination. |
|
|||
Quote:
Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR |
|
|||
Quote:
My bad, East. Hah. Despite misreading the play, I'd still go with a common foul and then a tech. Last edited by Dad; Fri Jan 22, 2016 at 01:58pm. |
|
|||
From what was described common foul for initial contact then a dead ball contact Technical.
Simply calling an intentional foul is incorrect unless you passed on the initial contact. But then the argument is you had a take-foul situation and you allowed the play to escalate to an INT foul. Your only course of action is common then T. The alternative is just crappy officiating either way IMO. You either passed on the first contact and allowed escalation or you adjudicated 2 individual actions as one. The correct path is most likely the path of most resistance during the game.
__________________
in OS I trust |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
It sounds to me like the push came before the whistle was sounded. If it was that quick, it could very well have been one act. I think I'd have to see it to know if I'd consider it one act or two.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association |
|
|||
Quote:
If this is how the play went down what would you call? |
|
|||
Quote:
But if it's a more violent push or more clearly after play is stopped, the whole scenario changes radically and common foul plus tech makes a lot of sense. Personally, I'm hard pressed to see an intentional foul here with a common foul occurring first. |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Foul In the Post: One Continuous Action or Technical Foul? | APG | Basketball | 10 | Sat Feb 02, 2013 08:24pm |
Common Shooting Foul Followed by a Technical Foul | tophat67 | Basketball | 9 | Tue Feb 21, 2012 10:57am |
Foul where distance gained prior to foul | wwcfoa43 | Football | 15 | Sun Feb 20, 2011 06:04pm |
Can you just call a team foul if you are not sure who the foul is on? Diebler | biggravy | Basketball | 18 | Sun Dec 13, 2009 07:20pm |
Anger over referee's foul calls triggers a bigger foul after game | BktBallRef | Basketball | 10 | Mon Mar 06, 2006 02:36am |