I had a strange one last night. My partner and I had a double whistle at the exact same time. We came together (all those non pre-gamers listen up this saved our arses) and to my horror, he had a call at the top of the key on the defense, and I had a call underneath on the offense. This doesn't seem to fit in the true or false double situation. What are your thoughts on how we should have handled it?

Sounds like two common fouls
 

Brian,
Good one! And, I'm guessing here.
My partner, or I, saw one happen first. And nobody else knew the difference.
If we <b>had to call each</b>, each gets their proper award, and then we go to the arrow for possession.
mick

Since it's not double foul, you can't penalize it as such. You have to determine which happened first. There's no other way to properly handle it.

This is by rule a false double foul. Pentilize in the order that it was done. But since no signals were made, I'd take the less controversial foul to the table live with it.

Are you sure?
 

Tim,
I thought a false double was at specifically different times, and not simultaneous acts.
mick

There are three problems with calling it a false double foul.

1- Brian says the whistles were simultaneous.

2- To have a FDF, you have to determine which foul occurred first.

3- If you determine which foul occurred, then you have determine if the second foul is intentional or flagrant. If it's not intentional or flagrant, it must be ignored.

4-19-1 Note
Contact after the ball has become dead is ignored unless it is ruled intentional or flagrant or is committed by or on an airborne shooter.

I think we have a bit of confusion with the wording of a double foul.

4-19-7a "A double personal foul is a situation in which two
opponents commit personal fouls against each other at approx. the same time."

It seems that we are limiting the definition of opponents to
individuals and that these individuals must foul each other.
However opponents can also refer to teams as a whole, ie: Who is red teams opponent tonight? answer: Blue.

If we use this definition then these fouls are clearly a double foul. Maybe we need an editorial change here.

Paul,

I think if the intent of the rule was as you suggest, it would be written differently. But I never read any interpretation that led me to to believe that this rule was refering to two teams and not two opposing players.

Consider a double technical foul (4-19-7b) and a simulataneous technical foul (4-19-9). If we accept your interpretation of this, it would also apply to the definition of a double technical. And if that were true, there would no such thing as a simultaneous technical foul. But there is.

If anything, these are simultaneous personal fouls. However, there's no definition for such, so you have to decide which one occurred first. Somebody's got to drop.

Tony

Thanks for the input!

We came together and decided that my partners call came first. No one was the wiser, and we didn't want to make our lives miserable.

By definition, I would think this is a false double, however the case book doesn't support it. I say this because the second foul techinically would have occured during the dead ball before the next live ball. All the case book cites are foul shot and inbound situations. Also, we really could not say who's was first. Knock wood it was a potenitally bad situation, but we sailed through.

Sounds like you did the right thing. The key is not to bird dog or give a prelim too quickly. If you don't, as you said, no one will ever be the wiser.

Like I posted earlier, the problem with calling a FDF is that the second foul has to be either intentional or flagrant since it's a dead ball. Either way, that's a can of worms you don't want to open.

Good decision!

I had this one once:

I'm the L: A4 gets good rebounding position on defender B4. A1 puts up a 3 point shot. Just after the release, A4 "clears out" B4. He had no reason to do it. I call the foul, for controlling rough play purposes. Then, the ball goes in, and the airborne shooter, A1, is fouled by B2. My partner calls the foul there. (B2 did not allow A1 to land. He was "there" too late to draw the PC.) We get together and decide that it's a false double foul. Never had one before - so I wasn't sure if we were actually "having one". B was not in the bonus.

..Mike

Mike,
Last year I would have done the same.
But after the emphasis on game flow at camp (and I might add, a lot of camps that I've read about) this year, I now would pass on A4's clear out until it was obvious to me that B4's rebounding position was compromised.
In your case B4 had no play on the ball because it went into the hole. If the shot was missed and the rebound went away from A4/B4, I still will not make the call because B4 had no resulting play. If the ball rebounded toward A4/B4, only then do we have a call, but probably, by then, B2 had already been called for fouling the airborn shooter.
Thus, the problem of the two common fouls is eliminated by a slight delay of the whistle and the lack of a clear advantage/disadvantge in the sitch.
Now, if B4 ends up sitting on the floor, or is bloody, or some such, that is another can o' worms, and that call should be made regardless of the result of the shot.
Doesn't seem exactly correct, according to the book, but it appears to be the "accepted way" to handle that situation.
mick

mick:

I can understand your decision. I use the same judgement in many calls in a game. However, maybe I didn't clarify enough. It was ROUGH PLAY. B4 was cleared out in a fashion that he lost his balance, and was forced to the floor.

That doesn't happen legally in a game that I officiate.

Bob Olsen (anyone know him???) told me once that every call exists twice - once now and once 5 minutes from now. I called it. Team B was angry. I already had a whistle, and that was the end of that.

Mike,
I can agree with that call, as I had mentioned above.
Sometimes "it" has to be called.
But it was not the False Double, it was two common fouls.
mick

Actually, this is a false double foul. The first foul occurred while the clock was running and the ball was live. The second foul occurred after the clock stopped and before it restarted after the first foul. Since an airborne shooter was fouled before he returned to the floor, the foul does not have to be flagrant or intentional to be called.

Since B isn't in the bonus, there are no Fts at B's end.
A1 shoots one shot with players on the lane, just as if the foul on A4 had not occurred, although it is, of course, still reported.

BTW, JugglingRef, I would have called the foul on A4 too.