Okay, I've been going over the fight from Friday night, and talked with my assignor earlier about it. Here's the question we couldn't quite answer. I know I goofed up the free throws and possession, so I want to figure out how to do it.

Here's the ruling.
Flagrant Personal on V32.
Flagrant Technicals on H22 & H42.
Well after the table has been notified of the ejections, V32 commits a Flagrant Technical on his way by white bench. (never should have been there, but too late now)

Now, before V32 popped off, I would have 2 shots for H for the flagrant personal, and 4 shots for V for the two flagrant T's. V ball at division line.

After the last T comes the question. Does this last flagrant T offset one of the other flagrant T's? If not, we have 4 shots for each team. If so, we have two shots for each team.
Who gets the ball? Arrow? Or V (more T's against H)? Or H (last T was against V)?

If this was high school basketball under rule 4-19-art 7 b:
a double technical foul .......
NOTE:No free throws are awarded and the ball is put in play by the team entitled to the throw in under the alternating-possession procedure at the divsion line opposite the table

I may be missing somethnig here but isnt that what you had?

Kinda. That's what we were thinking, but we're trying to determine if it matters that the number of T's was uneven. Also, whether it matters that they did not happen at approximately the same time. (A false double T?)
If the T's negate offset, then we're shooting for 1 T and 1 Flagrant Personal. Who gets the ball then? Arrow?

[Edited by Snaqwells on Feb 16th, 2004 at 04:32 PM]

check your mail please

V32 and H22 were the original two participants, weren't they? Call that a fight with a double flagrant personal foul, disqualify both of them, but no FT's are handed out(see first sentence of RULING in case book play 10.4.4SitA). Then give H42 a flagrant technical foul for fighting, and also give V32 another flagrant technical foul for his act on the way out. The last two fouls occured at different times, so you have a false double foul situation composed of 2 flagrant T's. Penalize these fouls in the order that they occurred. The visiting team will shoot 2 FT's for H42's T, and then the home team will shoot 2 FT's for V32's second T. The home team then gets the ball at center for V32's second T. The AP does not come into play at all. If the visiting head coach had been notified of V32's ejection for his first T, then he would also be charged with an indirect T for V32's second T.

Snaqwells, I would think that they happened far enough apart that they are not a double technical. A double foul has to be by opponents and directed toward each other. So both in space, and time, you have a false double here. You shoot the shots in the order the fouls occurred. The H player that took the flagrant personal shoots whatever shots he gets, then V shoots four by any player, then H shoots two by any player and gets the ball at the division line.

And if I got that all correct, I get some kind of trophy!

Okay, someone beat me to it, and got it right-er than me. Why do I even keep trying!?

We ended up ruling that H22's reaction was late enough to call it a dead ball foul. However, looking back, I could see going your route would have made it simpler. Thanks.
Thanks, also, for answering the question about whether the last flagrant T should offset one of the earlier T's on either H22 or H42.
Thanks, too, to Juulie.

V32 and H22 were the original two participants, weren't they? Call that a fight with a double flagrant personal foul, disqualify both of them, but no FT's are handed out(see first sentence of RULING in case book play 10.4.4SitA).
[/B][/QUOTE]
We ended up ruling that H22's reaction was late enough to call it a dead ball foul. However, looking back, I could see going your route would have made it simpler.
[/B][/QUOTE]Your other option would have been to call the original foul by V32 a flagrant technical foul instead of a flagrant personal foul. You can do that under Rule 10-3-9, even though the ball was live when V32 started the fight. H22 responded to V32, so his flagrant technical foul was part of the same action/fight- i.e. you still end up having a double technical foul, made up of 2 flagrant T's(R4-19-7b + NOTE), followed by the false double foul comprised of two different flagrant T's.

Still make sense?

We ended up ruling that H22's reaction was late enough to call it a dead ball foul. However, looking back, I could see going your route would have made it simpler.
[/B][/QUOTE]Your other option would have been to call the original foul by V32 a flagrant technical foul instead of a flagrant personal foul. You can do that under Rule 10-3-9, even though the ball was live when V32 started the fight. H22 responded to V32, so his flagrant technical foul was part of the same action/fight- i.e. you still end up having a double technical foul, made up of 2 flagrant T's(R4-19-7b + NOTE), followed by the false double foul comprised of two different flagrant T's.

Still make sense? [/B][/QUOTE]

Very much so. I hope I never have to deal with this again, but I don't want to get caught with my pants down again. I still need to see the tape, though. I can't help but think there's something I could have done to prevent it all in the first place.