Who gets the ball?

[gostars]

Church league. Blue coach is complaining about "elbows". L has a 30 second talk with coach and tells him that is enough. He had to get the last word in and she gives him a T. Gold shoots free throws and the before the throw-in calls time out. After the time out it is discovered that gold called an excessive time out. T on gold. Blue is given two shots and the ball. Is this right? All the T's were during the same ball period.



[Edited by gostars on Feb 28th, 2004 at 08:04 PM]

[One-Whistle]

Originally posted by gostars
Church league. Blue coach is complaining about "elbows". L has a 30 second talk with coach and tell him that is enough. He had to get the last word in and she gives him a T. Gold shoots free throws and the before the throw-in calls time out. After time-out scorer asks who called the timeout and proceeds to inform the refs that gold had already used up their timeout for the half. T on gold. After the shots for blue, they give the ball to blue. Is this right? All the T's were during the same ball period.

Your post is VERY difficult to "follow". Let me see if I got this correct:
Blue Coach "whacked" for inappropriate comments.
Gold FTs are administered.
Gold calls Excessive TO. "Whacked".
Blue FTs are administered.
Blue is then administered the Throw-in at the division line opposite the table.

All is good, because the Technical for excessive TO comes after the Gold FTs (NFHS 6-1-2c ...the ball becomes live on a FT, when it is at the disposal of the free thrower.) Therefore, it is NOT a false double techical situation; which I believe you are implying when you stated, "All the T's were during the same ball period."

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by One-Whistle

Your post is VERY difficult to "follow". Let me see if I got this correct:
Blue Coach "whacked" for inappropriate comments.
Gold FTs are administered.
Gold calls Excessive TO. "Whacked".
Blue FTs are administered.
Blue is then administered the Throw-in at the division line opposite the table.

All is good, because the Technical for excessive TO comes after the Gold FTs (NFHS 6-1-2c ...the ball becomes live on a FT, when it is at the disposal of the free thrower.) Therefore, it is NOT a false double techical situation; which I believe you are implying when you stated, "All the T's were during the same ball period."

If this isn't a false double foul, then what is it?

[One-Whistle]

I do not claim to be an expert here and I am sure you have done far more officiating than I can fathom. I openly admit I am still learning.

After rereading the criteria of a double foul and a false double foul I realize that I have made an error.

JR can you now explain how we should handle the original post?

Thanks.

[gostars]

sorry about the confusing post. I was in a hurry. I have tried to clean it up a little.

Yes Jurassic Referee, you got it right.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by One-Whistle

JR can you now explain how we should handle the original post?

I wasn't trying to be a smarta$$(for a change- and believe it or not ). I just wasn't sure of the point that you were trying to make. As you stated, the procedure that gostars used, and that you agreed with, was the proper way to handle the situation imo also. The point that I wanted to make was that the situation was a false double foul, got handled as a false double foul, and was also handled correctly.

Btw, the only thing left out, and gostars didn't mention it, so he probably got it right too, was how the T's were assessed. The T to the Blue head coach was a direct T, so his butt is now gonna be seatbelted. The T for the excess timeout by the Gold team is a team technical foul, with no indirect T charged to the Gold head coach- so he doesn't get seatbelted. That probably made the Blue head coach even happier.

[gostars]

I was in the stands (sure wish I was reffing and would have wacked the coach a lot faster.) and the coach should have been seat belted (I don't think either of them told him to stay seated.) but if the refs had looked over at the right time they could have tossed him.

[One-Whistle]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

I wasn't trying to be a smarta$$(for a change- and believe it or not ). I just wasn't sure of the point that you were trying to make. As you stated, the procedure that gostars used, and that you agreed with, was the proper way to handle the situation imo also. The point that I wanted to make was that the situation was a false double foul, got handled as a false double foul, and was also handled correctly.

I would have administered it correctly, just had the incorrect terminology.

Thanks for the clarification.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by One-Whistle
[/B]

I would have administered it correctly, just had the incorrect terminology.


[/B][/QUOTE]Exactly.

[Snake~eyes]

How about same situation but the excessive timeout is called after the first FT? Shoot the last FT, then go to the other end for 2?

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Snake~eyes
How about same situation but the excessive timeout is called after the first FT? Shoot the last FT, then go to the other end for 2?

Of course -- the penalties for fouls are administered in the order the fouls occurred.

[Forksref]

Why a 30-second talk with the coach? Tell the coach, "that's enough" and move on. You're just inviting trouble.

[gostars]

Originally posted by Forksref
Why a 30-second talk with the coach? Tell the coach, "that's enough" and move on. You're just inviting trouble.

Thats what I would have done if I were a ref but I was in the stands.