Technical or Intentional?

[Ralph Stubenthal]

Last night Varsity boys--my coofficial in lead position had a boy go up for a shot, was fouled, and while still in the air, was pushed hard by the same defender who fouled him. My partner's fist was in the air before the push and he immediately called a T on the player. We proceeded to back them up and shoot 4 shots. My question is not whether or not the T was warranted but whether it was the corrct call or not. The offense was definitely intentional but was not badd enough to be flagrant and since the shooter was still airborne at the time of the push, I feel like a T was innappropriate due to the fact that we still had a live ball situation because of the shooter still being airborne. Please help me figure this out. Had it been my call, and with the luxury of hindsight, I believe I would have just called it an intentional foul, gave him 2 shots and the ball back, Ralph.

[GaryFried]

If both contacts where totally separate and time difference significant then you could have a "multiple foul" on the same player. The second one would have been intentional. But that would be a hard one to sell and expalain to the coach. You are right that contact during a live ball is not a technical.

If there was not a significant time difference between the contacts, tie them together and call an intentional foul. This would probably be an easier sell to the coach and less problems.

[ken roberts]

First of all, the shooter being airborne has nothing to do with the ball being live or not. The airborne shooter provision just means that fouls on or by the airborne shooter while the ball is dead (e.g. made basket) are treated as though the ball were live.

Ralph, you are correct that a T shouldn't have been called (no matter if the ball was live or dead). You can see this from the definitions of a personal (4-19-1) and a technical (4-19-5) foul.

Gary, this can't be a multiple foul since the fouls weren't at approximately the same time. You could, in theory, call a "false multiple foul". This would mean that each foul would carry its own penalty...give the shooter 4 shots (3 shots if the ball went in) and the ball OOB at the spot nearest the intentional foul. (See Case 4.19.11)

However, i agree that just one intentional personal foul would have been the best call...

[b_silliman]

Good points everyone.
Sounds like the person who fouled was frustrated when the initial foul did not stop the player and he continued through and gave a second push.
If there was a significant time between the two, another option could be a flagrant foul resulting in ejection.