Does continuous motion apply to a double foul? Using case book play 4.19.7 and changing the play to contact occurring BEFORE the release of the shot, would you still count the basket?

The play would become A1 pivots to the basket and contact occurs between A1 and B1, before the release, 2 whistles go off and A1 continues his shot and scores. One official calls charging and one official calls blocking. Double foul, right? What do you do with the basket?

I can't find a play where the shot has not been released before the contact occurs. Any ideas?

Mulk

So begins another 8 page thread. :D

I'll offer this, the same reply I posted on McGriff, then, I'm done.

Good question. The rule on continuous motion addresses fouls by the defense and by a teammate of the shooter. It doesn't address a foul by the shooter because that's normally a PC foul. But when a foul is part of a double foul, it can't be a PC foul.

If the double foul had been between A2 and B1,and the shot by A1 had not been released, the shot would not be good.

Based on that ruling, I would rule the shot no good if it hasn't been released. MHO

Now, Mr. Denucci is free to disagree. :p

This would not be an issue if HS rules would not allow a blarge. I like the Women's rules on this one. However, No Basket in this play for HS.

How do they handle it?

We have to decide one way or the other. So, we give up to primary.

Not sure I follow.
 

How is that different from HS?

Peace

Doesn't HS Rules say we report both fouls?

It can't be a double foul, under FED rules. A player control foul is defined as a common foul(R4-19-6), and R4-19-2 says that a common foul CAN'T be part of a double foul. The officials have to decide which foul occured first, and then administer that foul only.This is similar to casebook play 2.6SitA&B, and is governed by the same language- <i>The officials <b>must</b> decide <b>definitely</b> which act occured <b>first</b>. There is <b>no</b> rules coverage to administer the acts as occurring simultaneously"</i>.

If you decide A1's foul occurred first, it's just a PC foul. If you decide B1's foul occurred first, count the basket and give A1 one FT.

JR, check 4.19.7 in the case book, it covers this play pretty well. The situations you are talking about in 2.6 apply to violations and fouls occuring at close to the same time, not fouls, so 2.6 isn't really even a consideration. Again we get to the pregame pregame pregame, try to not have blarges. In a double whistle situation, my partners and I release either to the person who's primary it is or in the classic blarge near the block we try to release to the lead. I know the book says about who should take it all the way to the basket, but I still feel more comfortable releasing to the lead if it is near the endline....

JR, maybe its not in the rule book, but I'm sure I've seen this in one the books on how to handle this situation and they say to report both fouls.

This is what we want to get away from on the Women's side. Primary official takes it, with one exception and that is the secondary def.

Bart, by secondary def, I assume you mean someone coming to help after the original defender has been beaten??

There does not seem to be a difference.
 

I guess my question to you is, why is this different from NCAA Women's rules? I know in the NCAA Men's side there have been "blarge" double fouls and both fouls were reported. So why is NCAA Women's have this different? Maybe you see something I do not in the rulebook, but the rule is the same on both sides of the NCAA Rulebook.

Peace

Bart, I can vaguely remember something similar to this someplace too. Could be an old case book play, or an approved ruling that was sent out. To the best of my recollection, the ruling was a double foul with no basket-because the ball wasn't in the air- followed by a jump ball(in the days before AP). About the same as what BBRef said above.

Helluva question by Mulk though. It's not covered in the books,as far as I can see. CMathews has a compelling argument with the case book play that he cited, but that one is different also.

Hey, wait, is this where I reword the case play, and then come up with my own interpretation, so that it says what I want it to?? ;) LOL couldn't resist after the other 8 page thread....