Penalty Administration????

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I am going to jump in here real quick because Mark, Jr., and I have a baseball game later that afternoon.

I am siding with Nevada on this play. Another example is A1 is going in for what should be an uncontested fast break layup and B-HC drops an F-bomb on the official covering the play. We have an NFHS Casebook Play that states that this a DDB situation, in other words, let A1 go in for his layup and then come back and penalize B-HC. But lets add another piece to this play: B1 rushes down court and in an attempt to block A1's layup attempt, fouls A1 in the Act of Shooting. Which foul occurred first: B-HC's TF or B1's PF? We definitely have a FMF, which should be penalized in the order that they occurred.

MTD, Sr.

[deecee]

Penalize in the order they occurred.

[Camron Rust]

Figured this would generate some discussion.


My response to the person who asked me about what should have been done...penalize in the order of occurrence.

That means you shoot the FTs for T, then you shoot the FTs for the shooting foul with the players on the lane and resume after those FTs as in any other shooting foul.

The subsequent personal foul eliminates the possession element of a T. This is not unlike a series of technical fouls that are not double fouls. All the FTs are shot, but possession at the end is determined by the last foul to have occurred. Alternately, this is not unlike a personal foul that occurs during the throwin for a T. The throwin is abandoned and the personal foul is penalized.

There is no need for a case play here, applying the penalties (in their entirety) in the order of occurrence is an NFHS rules fundamental.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

There is no need for a case play here, applying the penalties (in their entirety) in the order of occurrence is an NFHS rules fundamental.

But in this situation if you do what many have suggested, you have completely ignored part of the penalty part of the equation. Part of a Penalty of a T is who you give the ball to after a FT. You are not taking away FTs for the shooting foul in any way. You are still giving those FT, but the issue is are the players on the line or not.

Again I still feel this is just not an area covered in the rules that would need clarification by the higher ups. Because anytime you see in Rule 10 about penalties, they say that it involves the ball going to the division line. All you would be doing in this case is give the T and not give any other penalty portion of the foul.

Peace

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

But in this situation if you do what many have suggested, you have completely ignored part of the penalty part of the equation. Part of a Penalty of a T is who you give the ball to after a FT. You are not taking away FTs for the shooting foul in any way. You are still giving those FT, but the issue is are the players on the line or not.

Again I still feel this is just not an area covered in the rules that would need clarification by the higher ups. Because anytime you see in Rule 10 about penalties, they say that it involves the ball going to the division line. All you would be doing in this case is give the T and not give any other penalty portion of the foul.

Peace

It's covered. Look at Cameron's example. The throw in is not required to be given every time a T is called. Another example, T as time expires for 1st quarter. shoot the FTs but the throw in does not carry over to 2nd qtr. Fouls are penalized in the order they occur. In this OP the T happened first so those FTs are shot first. Then all players are on the line for the shooting foul. That is penalizing them in the order they occurred.

Frankly, it wouldn't be a bad idea if they said penalize the T last (even if it happened first as in OP) for reasons you've mentioned (Ts are deemed worse) but they havnt said it. The only thing they have said in rules is penalize all fouls in order they occurred. T is a foul. thx

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BigCat

It's covered. Look at Cameron's example. The throw in is not required to be given every time a T is called. Another example, T as time expires for 1st quarter. shoot the FTs but the throw in does not carry over to 2nd qtr. Fouls are penalized in the order they occur. In this OP the T happened first so those FTs are shot first. Then all players are on the line for the shooting foul. That is penalizing them in the order they occurred.

If it is covered, then we have a reference directly speaking to this situation. There are many rules that have holes in them and we talk about on this site. This would not be the first rule that has this issue, nor the last. Cameron's example is also not official or coming from the body that created the rules. I am saying that this clearly is a whole in the rules and no one in the rules does it say to ignore a portion of the penalty in this or any case. And the situations is very unusual as there are other plays that even tell us to wait to call a T until the play has finished. So there are some contradictions here. And I stand by my position because I feel that giving the ball to the FT shooter of the foul last is not what is the purpose and intent of the rules.

Originally Posted by BigCat

Frankly, it wouldn't be a bad idea if they said penalize the T last (even if it happened first as in OP) for reasons you've mentioned (Ts are deemed worse) but they havnt said it. The only thing they have said in rules is penalize all fouls in order they occurred. T is a foul. thx

The fundamental does not say, "Ignore the part of the penalty because it did not take place first...." The only issue IMO would be which order we shoot the FTs. But again, it is an interesting play and could change my position if I have more than "opinions" from random people on this topic. Right now we are just sharing our personal opinions. Great on some level, but might not be what those in power want or even care about honestly.

Peace

[deecee]

Not for nothing. I also agree with Rut's POV in addition to my earlier statement that was contradictory. In the end a T in HS awards the offended team the ball. There is clear direction on what would happen if another T was issued after the fact, but not so much for a common foul.

Also Nevada's previous example from post 6 is flawed in that the offended team was awarded the throw in and the ball was live. Nowhere is the expectation that they get unlimited attempts to complete the throw in for the T.

I think both applications are correct and I would be shocked if this happened in a sanctioned game and either method was rebuked (by anyone other than a coach of course). Both arguments are valid and I can see either being applicable.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Precisely why Rut is wrong.

Under NFHS rules fouls are administered in the order in which they occur.

The FTs for the technical foul with be attempted first by any member of Team A, then players will be allowed to occupy the lane spaces and the FTs for the shooting foul will be attempted by A1. The game will resume as after any normal FT attempts. The throw-in penalty for the technical foul vanishes. It is superceded by the penalty for the next foul.

I will make this clear with two examples.
1. B3 is charged with a technical foul. The FTs are attempted and the ball is placed at the disposal of A4 for the ensuing throw-in. While A4 is holding the ball B5 fouls A5 by holding him.
The game continues by administering the penalty for B5's foul. Either a throw-in closest to the spot of that foul or bonus FTs for A5. The throw-in which was in progress for the technical foul is halted and then disappears. You never go back to it.

2. A3 begins a try for goal, but has not yet released the ball. A4 is setting a screen for A3. B2 shoves A4 to the ground and then proceeds to foul A3 on the arm while he is releasing the try. Prior to this action Team B had five team fouls.
Both fouls are reported and charged to B2 because the ball was live the entire time. The penalty for the foul against A4 would be a throw-in, but since another foul occurred after that we skip that throw-in and proceed to the administration of the penalty for the foul against A3 in the act of shooting. The teams will line up and A3 with attempt FTs.

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I am going to jump in here real quick because Mark, Jr., and I have a baseball game later that afternoon.

I am siding with Nevada on this play. Another example is A1 is going in for what should be an uncontested fast break layup and B-HC drops an F-bomb on the official covering the play. We have an NFHS Casebook Play that states that this a DDB situation, in other words, let A1 go in for his layup and then come back and penalize B-HC. But lets add another piece to this play: B1 rushes down court and in an attempt to block A1's layup attempt, fouls A1 in the Act of Shooting. Which foul occurred first: B-HC's TF or B1's PF? We definitely have a FMF, which should be penalized in the order that they occurred.

MTD, Sr.

This thread has generated quite a bit of discussion. There have been a number of posts since my original post (see above) confirming what NevadaRef and I have already stated. Someone even went to the trouble of looking up the Casebook Play which I mentioned in my post. There have also been several examples given where penalties for a given infraction do not carry over to a new quarter, half, or overtime period. These are examples that led themselves to defending Nevada and my position: Penalize the fouls in the order in which they occurred. It is not rocket science.

MTD, Sr.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

This thread has generated quite a bit of discussion. There have been a number of posts since my original post (see above) confirming what NevadaRef and I have already stated. Someone even went to the trouble of looking up the Casebook Play which I mentioned in my post. There have also been several examples given where penalties for a given infraction do not carry over to a new quarter, half, or overtime period. These are examples that led themselves to defending Nevada and my position: Penalize the fouls in the order in which they occurred. It is not rocket science.

MTD, Sr.

You are not penalizing one of the fouls, at least not in total. That is the problem and why this needs clarity. Until then we are assuming what is wanted when only one kind of situation is discussed in the casebook.

Peace

[BoomerSooner]

In the absence of a case book situation to provide clarity to this discussion, the rule book is left as the only authority on the matter. Until someone can point to a case book situation that clearly alters the principle that fouls are penalized in the order of occurrence, the rule book's directive is the authority. Even the case book situation that allows for withholding the whistle does not provide a means for altering this principle. Admittedly it doesn't include the addition of another foul, but in the absence of that, we again return to the rule book.

On another note, there are some contending the likelihood of seeing this exact scenario play out is minimal and I agree with that point. The more likely scenario for this type of situation to occur is a player begins the shooting motion and a player or coach from the opposing team uses profanity prior to the shooter being fouled. I see this situation being analogous and much more likely.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You are not penalizing one of the fouls, at least not in total. That is the problem and why this needs clarity. Until then we are assuming what is wanted when only one kind of situation is discussed in the casebook.

Peace

Go back to the NFHS Casebook Play: A1 is driving in for an contested layup and before A1 is in the Act of Shooting B-HC commits and Unsportsmanlike TF. The NFHS CB Ruling is to treat B-HC's infraction as a DDB and wait to A1's FGA has left his/her hand before stopping further play. But lets add something extra to that NFHS CB Play: B1 hustles down the court in an effort to keep A1 from scoring, and after B-HC has committed his TF, B1 fouls A1 in the Act of Shooting. We have a FMF. FMFs are penalized in the order in which they are committed with the ball being put into play as if the last foul in the sequence is the only foul that was committed. B1's PF was the last foul in the FMF sequence.

MTD, Sr.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Go back to the NFHS Casebook Play: A1 is driving in for an contested layup and before A1 is in the Act of Shooting B-HC commits and Unsportsmanlike TF. The NFHS CB Ruling is to treat B-HC's infraction as a DDB and wait to A1's FGA has left his/her hand before stopping further play. But lets add something extra to that NFHS CB Play: B1 hustles down the court in an effort to keep A1 from scoring, and after B-HC has committed his TF, B1 fouls A1 in the Act of Shooting. We have a FMF. FMFs are penalized in the order in which they are committed with the ball being put into play as if the last foul in the sequence is the only foul that was committed. B1's PF was the last foul in the FMF sequence.

MTD, Sr.

What casebook play? Reference?

Peace

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

What casebook play? Reference?

Peace

From the 2015-16 NFHS Casebook: Casebook Play 10.4.1, Situation F: A1 is driving toward the basket for an apparent goal when the official, while trailing the play advancing in the direction the ball is being advanced, is cursed by the head coach or bench personnel of Team B. How should the official handle this situation. RULING: The official shall withhold blowing the whistle until A1 has either made or missed the shot. The official shall then sound the whistle and assess Team B head coach or bench personnel with at technical foul. If the official judges the act to be flagrant, the offender shall be ejected. If A' coach or bench personnel was the offender, the whistle shall be sounded immediately when the unsporting act occurs. (R1-S4-A1a)

MTD, Sr.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

From the 2015-16 NFHS Casebook: Casebook Play 10.4.1, Situation F: A1 is driving toward the basket for an apparent goal when the official, while trailing the play advancing in the direction the ball is being advanced, is cursed by the head coach or bench personnel of Team B. How should the official handle this situation. RULING: The official shall withhold blowing the whistle until A1 has either made or missed the shot. The official shall then sound the whistle and assess Team B head coach or bench personnel with at technical foul. If the official judges the act to be flagrant, the offender shall be ejected. If A' coach or bench personnel was the offender, the whistle shall be sounded immediately when the unsporting act occurs. (R1-S4-A1a)

MTD, Sr.

Thanks I just wanted to know what play I was using for this discussion.

Peace