Did we get it Right???

[garote]

Weird chain of events Just want to know if we got it right??....In an AAU Christmas Tourney had a player from white foul the red team player on a shot. My partner is the "L" and calls the foul. Then the red player that just fouled the shooter kicks the shin of another player right in front of my partner who calls the intentional foul. As he is reporting the foul, reds head coach unloads the "F" bomb. So now a Tech to the coach.

So we had 2 for the shot, 2 for the intentional, 2 for the tech. Now the question. We placed the ball on the base line for the white team because of the Intentional foul. Right or wrong????

[tomegun]

First, I would say to take the ball out at the division line. Second, the player that kicked the other player should be thrown out of the game.

[ChuckElias]

Assuming that you're playing by Fed rules. . .

Originally posted by garote
player from white foul the red team player on a shot.

Personal foul. Penalty, two FTs.

Then the red player that just fouled the shooter kicks the shin of another player right in front of my partner

Dead ball fighting. Flagrant technical foul. Penalty, 2 FTs, plus the ball at the division line. Offender is DQ'd.

reds head coach unloads the "F" bomb. So now a Tech to the coach.

Direct technical foul charged to the head coach. Penalty, 2 FTs, plus the ball at the division line; head coach loses coaching box privileges.

Again, assuming that this is under Fed rules, you penalize the fouls in the order in which they occur. That means that the player who was originally fouled on the shot gets 2 FTs with no one on the lane. Then anyone on the white team can shoot the next 4 FTs. Then white gets the ball at midcourt opposite the table.

The penalties are slightly different for NCAA, but the result is essentially the same. 2 FTs for red, then 4 FTs for white and the ball at midcourt. (Coach would also not lose the coaching box.)

[Edited by ChuckElias on Jan 2nd, 2004 at 11:35 AM]

[Rich]

And the kick should've been a technical foul, since it involved dead ball contact. Flagrant? Had to have been there, I guess, but a kick sure sounds like it meets the FED requirement for fighting.

[Lotto]

Assumung NF rules, white should get the ball at the division line. You penalize the fouls in the order in which they occur. So the red player who was fouled would get 2 FTs, followed by 2 FTs for the white player who was fouled, followed by 2 FTs by a designated red player for the T. Since the last foul was the T on the red coach, white gets the ball.

If you're using NCAA rules, you shoot the FTs for the T immediately. You'd then shoot the FTs for the other fouls in the order in which they occured. The last foul was the intentional by the white player, so the ball would be put in play by red at the designated spot nearest where the foul occured.

Now, kicking a player falls under the definition of fighting, and the penalty should be a flagrant foul, which carries ejection as part of the penalty.

Finally, the kicking occured while the ball was dead, so it should be a T, not a personal foul.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Lotto
If you're using NCAA rules, you shoot the FTs for the T immediately. You'd then shoot the FTs for the other fouls in the order in which they occured. The last foul was the intentional by the white player, so the ball would be put in play by red at the designated spot nearest where the foul occured.

Not quite, Lotto, b/c the kicking foul is dead ball contact. In NCAA (for men, anyway ), this is an intentional technical foul, which carries possession of the ball at midcourt as part of the penalty. So white ends up with the ball at midcourt, regardless of the order in which you shoot the FTs.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
The penalties are slightly different for NCAA, but the result is essentially the same. 2 FTs for red, then 4 FTs for red and the ball at midcourt. (Coach would also not lose the coaching box.)

After thinking about it, I said this incorrectly. Lotto's right, for NCAA you shoot the FTs for the coach's technical first. Then, go to the point of interruption, which is red's FTs for the personal foul (with no one on the lane). Then shoot the intentional tech and give the ball to white at midcourt.

The bottom line is that it doesn't matter what order you shoot them in, b/c you're going to shoot them ALL with no one on the lane and then white is going to get the ball. But to do it by the book, I think I've got it right above. . .

Bob, Dan, Dev, anyone. . . thoughts?

[tomegun]

Originally posted by garote
Weird chain of events Just want to know if we got it right??....In an AAU Christmas Tourney had a player from white foul the red team player on a shot. My partner is the "L" and calls the foul. Then the red player that just fouled the shooter kicks the shin of another player right in front of my partner who calls the intentional foul. As he is reporting the foul, reds head coach unloads the "F" bomb. So now a Tech to the coach.

So we had 2 for the shot, 2 for the intentional, 2 for the tech. Now the question. We placed the ball on the base line for the white team because of the Intentional foul. Right or wrong????

Chuck, I think we should get this clear before figuring out what to do according to the NCAA.

White fouls red - 2 shots

Red kicks white (it says red just fouled then kicks another player. I thought white fouled red?) - intentional T 2 shots and ball at division line

Red coach - 2 shots point of interruption

The intentional T gives the ball to white so the POI is at the division line for the T on the coach. So, I would administer the shots T, intentional T, foul shots. Should the foul shots come before the intentional T? I think the intentional T is the only thing that could effect the order you shoot the shots.

This is a constructive scenario.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by tomegun
Chuck, I think we should get this clear before figuring out what to do according to the NCAA.

White fouls red - 2 shots

Red kicks white (it says red just fouled then kicks another player. I thought white fouled red?) - intentional T 2 shots and ball at division line

Red coach - 2 shots point of interruption

Tommy, I'm not sure I'm understanding you. Are you discussing NCAA rules or Fed. If you're talking Fed, then there is no such thing as POI for technical fouls. The ball always goes to the division line (even for double T's, I think).

If we're talking HS rules, then my first post in the thread is the way to do it. I won't rehash it here.

If we're talking about NCAA rules (for men!). . .

The intentional T gives the ball to white so the POI is at the division line for the T on the coach.

I think I disagree with this. The FTs have not been shot, so the POI can't be the throw-in. The POI must be with FTs.

So, I would administer the shots T, intentional T, foul shots. Should the foul shots come before the intentional T?

I'm not sure, to be honest. But since we're going to give the ball as part of the penalty, I would administer the personal FTs first, then give the T FTs and the ball.

[Lotto]

Under NCAA (men or women), I think that the kick would count as fighting (4-23.3a, 10-17.1b) and so this would be a flagrant technical foul (10-18.1).

I did mess up the penalty, though, forgetting that the penalty for a flagrant T doesn't involve POI. You'd do the FTs for the coach's T, then go to POI, which is the FTs for the personal foul followed by the FTs for the flagrant T.

I think that the rule book contradicts itself on where the ball is put back in play (for men). 10-14.1 (Men) tells us to go with the division line. 10-18.4 tells us to go with the spot closest to the foul.

For the women, 10-14.1 (Women) and 10-18.4 are consistent---go with the spot closest to the foul.

[Edited by Lotto on Jan 2nd, 2004 at 01:27 PM]

[SMEngmann]

Assuming that the kick by the red player (who was originally fouled in the act of shooting) was a flagrant T and warrented ejection, shouldn't the first course of action then be to inform the player and coach of disqualification and bring on a replacement who would then be the designated shooter of the free throws for the first foul (in the act of shooting)?

[tomegun]

Chuck I was talking NCAA rules and what I typed was kind of jacked up!
IMHO the POI was after what should have been an Intentional T/Flagrant. I agree with you that the order isn't really an issue. However the POI was at the point where one team would have been awarded the ball at the division line. If you look at the original post it didn't make sense and it contradicted itself. Maybe it was edited between my earlier post and now. OK something was changed. Look at the original post by garote then what I have in quotes in my second post. Now Garote's first post is understandable. White will shoot 2 free throws and 4 shots for technicals. Then the ball will be taken out at the division line. NCAA rules.

[Edited by tomegun on Jan 2nd, 2004 at 06:38 PM]

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by tomegun

White fouls red - 2 shots

Red kicks white (it says red just fouled then kicks another player. I thought white fouled red?)

I was confused about the kick, too Who kicked whom? Doesn't matter, I guess, in terms of administration. This is a false multiple foul, right? Everything gets treated separately, whoever did the kicking should be DQ'd, ball goes to the division line at the end of the whole rigamarole, to the team whose coach didn't get the T. And lots of paperwork to do after the game is over.

[davidw]

So, those of you who do h.s., college--either or both, preferably both as I want an opinion on all three, which set of mechanics/rules do you prefer for this situation and why?

It seems to me that Fed. rules/mech. are most straight forward and easiest to admin. Any agreement with this?

[tomegun]

IMHO in this situation it is a wash or close to it. Overall, I prefer NCAA rules. I think NCAA rules are a combination of Firmer/more common sense than fed.