Technical assessed - no free throws

[hoopologist]

MCBB

Caveat: I'm not an official (how many posts will I need to caveat?).

I'm sure there's a simple reason a technical foul is clearly the call yet no free throws are assessed. The only thing I can think of is that a double technical was called and I just didn't pick it up.

It all stems from some action in the lane at left on the try for goal. After vying for position, #4 Red falls. Then once he's up the opponent appears to go over to make all good. At which point #4 shoves him and earns a technical.

After a rather lengthy discussion by the crew, a simple throw in?

Sorry about the video quality. I'll figure that part out eventually.

[Nevadaref]

The initial foul is holding by a player in gold during the rebound.
The shove by red looks to be assessed a T for dead ball contact by one of the officials.
I have no idea why FTs were not awarded for the T. Maybe it was rescinded.
The game was resumed with an end line throw-in by red due to the initial foul by gold.

[Camron Rust]

Maybe the gold player said something that drew a T as well. That would be consistent with going to the point of interruption.

[JRutledge]

Without seeing the reporting, this could have been a double T, which you do not shoot FTs. Without sound or commentary, that is likely the situation.

Peace

[frezer11]

I don't actually see an initial T called. I see one official about to do it, but never actually make the signal.

Plus how about the rim hang at 1:07???

[Raymond]

Towards the end of the video you can see the officials report a T against Gold as well.

The box score shows a double foul and double T's at the 2:29 mark of the 1st half.

Peach Belt

Perhaps a T for initial stepover? No, must have been they thought he did something when he came over.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Towards the end of the video you can see the officials report a T against Gold as well.

The box score shows a double foul and double T's at the 2:29 mark of the 1st half.

Peach Belt

Nice research. That answers it.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Perhaps a T for initial stepover? No, must have been they thought he did something when he came over.

That's what I thought.

[hoopologist]

Thanks guys. I knew the only legitimate possibility would be a double tech however I kept wondering why the second wasn't reported (the first is on the video @ :38).

So I guess my follow-up is what did #32W do to earn a T? Looks like he wanders over to make amends with an opponent who's been inadvertently hurt.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by hoopologist

Thanks guys. I knew the only legitimate possibility would be a double tech however I kept wondering why the second wasn't reported (the first is on the video @ :38).

So I guess my follow-up is what did #32W do to earn a T? Looks like he wanders over to make amends with an opponent who's been inadvertently hurt.

We have no idea what was said or done during all those interactions.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[stripes]

Looks to me like Gold 32 initiates with Red 4. Both would get a T from me if I was going to call any.