Penalty Administration????

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Altor

Except that wasn't the order it occurred in the OP. The Technical occurred before the shooting foul.

Well we do not have a POI aspect to this, so I do not know how you can give the T first. I guess if you want the semantics of it to be you shoot the T first, but still at the end of it you give the ball to the offended team at the division line. Either way is really not a major concern if you ask me. The T does not wipe out the shooting foul and if you want to be that precise, then shoot the T first, but that to me is semantics based on the play we are discussing and why I asked about the BI element to this. Because it might be possible as well that the very same player shoots all the FT and you are shooting 4 FTs either way.

Hey, some people worry about the smallest things.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Hey, some people worry about the smallest things.

Like wrongly awarding a team possession of the ball. Must not be a big deal where some people officiate.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Like wrongly awarding a team possession of the ball. Must not be a big deal where some people officiate.

Are you saying you are giving the ball to Team B at some point?

Peace

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Are you saying you are giving the ball to Team B at some point?

Peace

Penalize in the order fouls occurred. T occurred first. A gets 2 FTs for the T. Then put all players on the line and shoot the Fts for the shooting foul. A will not get the ball out of bounds for the T. The T happened before the shooting foul.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Like wrongly awarding a team possession of the ball. Must not be a big deal where some people officiate.

You have a case play showing that we don't give the ball back to Team A after a technical on Team B?

One play you cited is irrelevant because it doesn't deal with technical fouls. The other play you cited is not relevant because the throwin had started for the technical foul, which means the ball became live.

You need to come up with something on this one.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Or not giving Team A the ball back following a T on Team B?

Exactly. I did not realize that a shooting foul superseded a T on a player. And BTW, this is all fouls committed by the same freakin team!!!!

Peace

[OKREF]

If the technical foul happened first, which means there would have been a whistle, does the ball become dead at the moment the whistle blows? If so there is no foul on the shooter. That contact would be ignored unless flagrant or intentional. Just asking a question.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by OKREF

If the technical foul happened first, which means there would have been a whistle, does the ball become dead at the moment the whistle blows? If so there is no foul on the shooter.

Continous motion would still apply.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Continous motion would still apply.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

Yeah, I see that.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by OKREF

If the technical foul happened first, which means there would have been a whistle, does the ball become dead at the moment the whistle blows? If so there is no foul on the shooter. That contact would be ignored unless flagrant or intentional. Just asking a question.

The play would be dead technically before that but by definition I do not think we just ignore an airborne shooter or allow all illegal contact with them to be simply ignored if it is apart of the play before it became dead. The whistle does not kill the play, it is already dead. It does matter on some level what happened first. I just do not believe that you give the ball to Team A on a FT and not administer the T properly.

And until I read a ruling or case play, I stand by that part of my comments.

Peace

[OKREF]

This answers my question.

casebook

6.7C: Under what circumstances does the ball remain live when a foul occurs just prior to the ball being in flight during a try or tap?

Ruling: the ball would ordinarily become dead at once, but it remains live if the foul is by the defense, and this foul occurs after A1 has started the try or tap for goal and time does not expire before the ball is in flight. The foul by the defense may be either personal or technical and the exception to the rule applies to field goal tries and taps and free throw tries. (4-11; 4-41-1)

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The play would be dead technically before that but by definition I do not think we just ignore an airborne shooter or allow all illegal contact with them to be simply ignored if it is apart of the play before it became dead. The whistle does not kill the play, it is already dead. It does matter on some level what happened first. I just do not believe that you give the ball to Team A on a FT and not administer the T properly.

And until I read a ruling or case play, I stand by that part of my comments.

Peace

The shooter was in the act. The whistle for B1 T stops the clock but, because shooter A1 was in the act, the ball remains live. Continuous motion. Fouls are always penalized in the order which they occurred in NFHS. The fact that the first foul here happens to be a T doesn't change that. If you give A the ball out of bounds at division line you are in effect, penalizing the T last. Not in the order they occurred.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I guess if you want the semantics of it to be you shoot the T first, but still at the end of it you give the ball to the offended team at the division line. Either way is really not a major concern if you ask me.

To be clear for others reading this thread, the part in red is absolutely wrong under NFHS rules, and giving an unwarranted possession to a team certainly is a major concern, if you ask me.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

To be clear for others reading this thread, the part in red is absolutely wrong under NFHS rules, and giving an unwarranted possession to a team certainly is a major concern, if you ask me.

Only 3 people have responded to this topic outside of the OPer, so not sure what people you are talking about. And you and I are the ones that have said the most and as usual you are trying to prove something that is irrelevant. But what else is new?

Peace

[Adam]

Before I read through all the responses:

1. Shoot the T with the lane cleared.

2. Line them up and shoot the FTs for the shooting foul.

Resume from the 2nd set of FTs as if there was no T.