What do you have???

[bludevil1221]

Last night I had a middle school game. Both teams were very good. Toward the end of the game things get tight, and in one play particularly I was lead on a fast break and there was one offense and two defense. Offense goes up for layup, first defender make a legit attempt at a block and fouls, I blow my whistle. Almost immediately the second defender creams the offensive player making no attempt at the ball, my partner blows his whistle and calls intentional foul on the second defender. Not sure what the correct procedure would be but we gave two shots and the ball. The question mainly is this, Was the second foul a dead ball foul?, and Should we have penalized both fouls? I am slightly confused on this call becasue I thought the ball was live, when a shooter is fouled, until the shooter lands, or the shot is made or missed.
It was a crazy play and happened so fast. Some advice would be appreciated. Thanks guys...

[DownTownTonyBrown]

I think in most cases one would call the first foul and ignore the second. If everyone was okay and you stuck around long enough to ensure a fight didn't start, you could probably get away with just this one foul. However, if you felt the second foul was very severe (player was hurt) and truly was intentional then the proper call would likely be a flagrant technical ==> ejection.

I would have had to been there to see the result.

We have had similar discussions here before ... like shooter is fouled and then comes down onto a legally positioned defender to commit a PC foul? Do you call both? Do reason the the first caused the second and therefore ignore the PC foul? Severity/intent/tone of the game has a lot to with what you should call on this play. Generally only the first foul is called but in my opinion it needs to be obvious that you have noted the situation and noted who the involved players were. You've got to stick around for this type of a play and not just run away to make your report. Ensure the peace or penalize appropriately.

Two appropriate casebook plays are 4.19.11 and 4.19.6. However, I have never seen either of these plays called this way; I'm sure some here on the board probably have had these experiences and have called them according to the rulebook. We will have to await their answers.

[Edited by DownTownTonyBrown on Nov 13th, 2003 at 04:05 PM]

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by bludevil1221
Last night I had a middle school game. Both teams were very good. Toward the end of the game things get tight, and in one play particularly I was lead on a fast break and there was one offense and two defense. Offense goes up for layup, first defender make a legit attempt at a block and fouls, I blow my whistle. Almost immediately the second defender creams the offensive player making no attempt at the ball, my partner blows his whistle and calls intentional foul on the second defender. Not sure what the correct procedure would be but we gave two shots and the ball. The question mainly is this, Was the second foul a dead ball foul?, and Should we have penalized both fouls? I am slightly confused on this call becasue I thought the ball was live, when a shooter is fouled, until the shooter lands, or the shot is made or missed.
It was a crazy play and happened so fast. Some advice would be appreciated. Thanks guys...

No, the second foul wasn't a dead ball foul. If it was, it would be a T (which only changes the spot of the throw-in, in this example).

Multiple fouls, one of which is flagrant.

Count the basket (if the ball went in), one FT for the first foul, two FTs for the second foul, ball out of bounds.

The number of FTs doesn't depend (in this case) on whether the ball went in.

[Hawks Coach]

Bob, you are technically right, but I think I side with DTTB on the "had to be really bad" call - the dead ball T on this is a possibility that I would only want enforced if the foul really screamed for it. However, DTTB, I can't see going with the common foul when one ref has given the intentionhal foul signal. That is inviting even more trouble.

I think that going wih the intentional as the overriding foul is the best way to deal with this situation unless you really think you need the multple foul scenario. You will give shots and ball, not a bad outcome for the fouled team, and you avoid the bizarre, not a bad outcome for the officiating team.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

Count the basket (if the ball went in), one FT for the first foul, two FTs for the second foul, ball out of bounds.

You lost me here Bob. Since 1 of the fouls is "intentional or flagrant" we get 2 FTs per foul, no? Per Summary of Fouls immediately following rule 10 in the fed book. Plus count the made basket.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
I can't see going with the common foul when one ref has given the intentionhal foul signal. That is inviting even more trouble.

I think that going wih the intentional as the overriding foul is the best way to deal with this situation unless you really think you need the multple foul scenario. You will give shots and ball, not a bad outcome for the fouled team, and you avoid the bizarre, not a bad outcome for the officiating team.

I like that... basically ignore the first because of its minor nature and penalize the second, more serious foul.

Nice, nice. Much easier to sell than ignoring the serious foul. Thanx!

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

You lost me here Bob. Since 1 of the fouls is "intentional or flagrant" we get 2 FTs per foul, no? Per Summary of Fouls immediately following rule 10 in the fed book. Plus count the made basket.

Each foul is penalized seperately since they occured one after the other. The first foul warrants only 1 or 2 shots based on whether the goal was scored or not. There would automatically be 2 FTs per fouls if both of them were intentional.

[Hawks Coach]

. . . would actually punish both fouls? I have never seen this. It is a nice rulebook solution, but in reality, are you going to enforce both or ignore one and get the most serious? Just like if two players simultaneously foul the same shooter without the INT, you are going to hit one and not the other, even though you could have both.

[Kelvin green]

If the kid bulldozed him pretty good, I will never let that go... I am going to go with a more severe one, I am sure that I dont want to go with a multiple foul as well. If the second foul as you say happened almost imeediately, I'd take my pick- and take the hard one.

Guaranteed if you dont call the hard one- you'll have trouble the rest of the night because it says Its ok to take a cheap shot even if it is simultaneous.


We do that now... How many times does a player get hit by two guys on the arm and we pick one?

This is where a slower whistle, and in a crash getting with players menas you have time to think about it.

Even if it is not flagrant call the intentional. If it was that obvious if it is I doubt that the offenive coach is going to be yelling for a multiple foul. He wants his shooter protected and we did. If it flagrant toss the kid, give the team two shots and the ball... Flagrants are obvious enough-- I again doubt anyone would question you and ask for a multiple foul...

[Mark Dexter]

If anything, I have a false multiple foul here - both are live ball, but there's sufficient separation. The second foul is intentional (as called), so we have the 2 shots for the foul by B1 and 2 shots for the intentional foul by B2.

[williebfree]

HawksCoach asked a legitimate question which points out the difference between (separates) officials who call the game and the officials who call the rulebook.

==========

For the record: I am awarding the basket and calling the harder foul as an intentional (or possibly flagrant, if deemed appropriate).

I had a nearly identical situation last year during a State Championship game (8th Grade Great Northwoods league).

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Camron Rust

Each foul is penalized seperately since they occured one after the other. The first foul warrants only 1 or 2 shots based on whether the goal was scored or not. There would automatically be 2 FTs per fouls if both of them were intentional.

OK, I thought that myself originally - then how do you explain this part:

The number of FTs doesn't depend (in this case) on whether the ball went in.

My opinion is we have multiple fouls (approximately the same time) on the shooter. If 1 of the fouls is judged intentional/flagrant we have 4 FTs.

(Well actually my opinion is we have 1 foul, but that kinda takes the fun out of the discussion.)

[Tim Roden]

I do agree with what is being said. If I were taking a test it is two shots for the first foul, two shots and the ball for the second foul. All by the same player. So four shots with noone at the line. In real life though, I would only call the intentional foul. Ignore the first foul that was there. If I called this in a JH game and he made all four free throws and made a three point shot after words, the seven point swing would probably settle the game.

[tomegun]

Bludevil, can you give us a more detailed timeline of what occured? Was there obviously two whistles? Where did the play happen? I ask this because I'm trying to visualize a situation where I would blow a second whistle without having the first. Were the whistles close enough that the common fan would have thought there was only one whistle?

If there were two distinct whistles, my opinion is we cannot ignore this and there would be 3 free throws if the shot was good and 4 free throws if the shot was missed. The ball would be taken out of bounds by the shooting team in either situation. I don't think penalizing the two fouls, if they were two distinct fouls as far as time goes, would make one a "rulebook" official. Ignoring this situation and taking the easy way out could cause more problems than handling it by the book. We have to remember that these are three different players (two that fouled and one that was fouled), two different coaches and the possibility of multiple parents/fans. If contact is ignored this can cause the game to go down the tubes and never be recovered. A contact foul like this, depending on the actual timeline and severity of the contact, cannot be treated the same as a player carrying the ball in the backcourt with no pressure or advantage.

This is my opinion and I can see the opinions of others but unless we deem this contact as incidental then I wouldn't be comfortable taking the easy way out. We can always explain contact that was called to a coach, partner, parent, player or assigner but with video and all the other technology how can we explain contact that is ignored when it isn't incidental? Just my opinion.

[Bobby]

>Offense goes up for layup, first defender make a legit attempt at a block and fouls, I blow my whistle.<

That's a personal foul and one or two shots, depending on the status of the basket.

>Almost immediately the second defender creams the offensive player making no attempt at the ball, my partner blows his whistle and calls intentional foul on the second defender.<

That's a second foul on the same play -- NOT a dead ball foul. That's unsportsmanlike, which is the proper whistle.

>Not sure what the correct procedure would be but we gave two shots and the ball. The question mainly is this, Was the second foul a dead ball foul?, and Should we have penalized both fouls? I am slightly confused on this call becasue I thought the ball was live, when a shooter is fouled, until the shooter lands, or the shot is made or missed.<

Actually, reading the FIBA rule book (2000) might help because it defines the procedure properly. I have submitted Article 56 (Special Situations), as it offers a well-written procedure on how this is done.


Art. 56 Special situations

56.1 Definition
In the same stopped-clock period which follows a foul or a violation, special situations may arise when additional foul(s) are committed.

56.2 Procedure
56.2.1 All fouls shall be charged and all penalties identified.

56.2.2 The order in which all fouls occurred shall be determined.

56.2.3 All equal penalties against both teams and all double foul penalties shall be cancelled. Once the penalties have been cancelled the fouls are considered as never having occurred.

56.2.4 The right to possession of the ball as part of the last penalty still to be administered shall cancel any prior rights to possession of the ball and these shall be forfeited as a result.

56.2.5 Once the ball has become live on the first or only free throw or on a throw-in, then that penalty can no longer be used for cancelling another penalty.

56.2.6 All remaining penalties shall be administered in the order in which they were called.

56.2.7 If, after the cancellation of equal penalties against both teams, there are no other penalties remaining for administration, the game shall be resumed as in Art. 45.2.2. (Team in control of ball regains control. If neither team in control, jump ball.)

In this case, 52.2.6 states both fouls are administered. The first foul (personal) is penalised and the penalty of two shots is followed by the second (the FIBA term for an intentional foul is unsportsmanlike) foul is penalised with two more shots. Possession of the ball at mid-court is then awarded.