Dead ball technical- High School rules questioin
happened during a women's NCAA basketball playoff, but my question is more of a high school rules question.
A1 is about to throw the ball in from the sidelines. The official has not handed the ball to A1 (dead ball). player A2 makes a cut to the ball when she is blocked by B2. The official administering the throw- in, raises his fist for a foul. A2 continues and stumbles and lands a forearm into player B3 jaw (not intentional but a solid hit). The crew huddles and calls a technical (1) on B2 and ignores the second foul. B2 shoots 2 free throws and gets the ball at half court. I understand a dead ball technical, but I don't think the second foul (technical) should have been ignored. If it was called would it be simultaneous technical or each administered separately. thanks Stew in VA |
Sounds like the first contact caused inadvertent contact. It is certainly not simultaneous. One happened first then resulted in another action. I am not inclined to call a foul on the second one if all that happened when a player stumbles into another.
Honestly, without seeing this, all of this is speculation. But certainly by definition not simultaneous by rule. They did not happen at the same time based on your discription. Peace |
Under NFHS rules contact during a dead ball which is not by or on an airborne shooter is ignored unless it is intentional or flagrant.
Therefore, a common blocking foul would be ignored by rule in this situation. Just have a word with the players to check that everyone is fine and then administer the throw-in. 4-19-1 NOTE: Contact after the ball has become dead is incidental unless it is ruled intentional or flagrant or is committed by or on an airborne shooter. |
Quote:
I agree...this is a big nothing. Play on. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
IF the second contact rose to the level of a Intentional Foul (NCAAW) or a T (FED) then: NCAAW: The fouls would offset and we'd resume POI FED: It's a little hard to judge from the words, but I would tend to NOT view this as simultaneous, but rather retaliatory (not a rule book term), so I'd penalize both. Shoot the FTs in the order the fouls occurred and give the ball to the last offended team at the division line for a throw-in |
Can you please tell us what game it was so we can possibly pull up the play?
|
Quote:
So the answer in High school---2 separate fouls administered in the order that they occurred. The fact that the ball was not handed (bounced) to the player made the play and the call interesting Stew in Va |
Similar Situation ...
https://forum.officiating.com/basket...ml#post1047027
Quote:
Quote:
|
For The Good Of The Cause ...
Pushing the envelope for the good of the cause.
4-19-3-B: An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that may or may not be premeditated and is not based solely on the severity of the act. Intentional fouls include, but are not limited to: Contact away from the ball with an opponent who is clearly not involved with a play. With the official holding the ball, is there an actual play occurring? |
Quote:
"include, but are not limited to" |
Is It A Stretch ???
Quote:
During the time period before a throwin, while the official still has the ball in his hands before disposal, can a "simple" hold by a defender in any way be considered to be contact away from the ball with an opponent who is clearly not involved with a play, and thus, in any way be considered to be an intentional foul? The defender is clearly not involved with a play, because there is no play occurring at the time of the contact. By "simple" hold I mean that the defender doesn't grab a jersey, push from behind, or bear hug the offensive player. How about if one pushes the "not limited to" aspect of the definition? When I picture various types of intentional fouls, I don't picture this as being one, but by rule ... dead ball contact ... not involved with a play ... yada, yada, yada? I got away with this in my non-consequential play above. Was able to bamboozle a young, inexperienced coach with "rule language". Still left a bad taste in my mouth. I would have hated to have called this in a "big" consequential play and have had to explain it to my assigner. My assigner is not one to be bamboozled and distracted by shiny object "rule language". |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Words Of The Wise ...
Quote:
Quote:
Probably handsome as well. |
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:38am. |