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.

False double foul.
 

When A1 commits a personal foul against B1 at the sametime that B3 commits a personal foul against A3, a false double foul has occured. The fouls are penalized in the order that they occur with the penalty for the last foul determining how the ball will remain or be put into play. In this situation since the fouls happened simultaneously the alternating possession arrow will be used to put the ball into play after all of the penalties have been imposed.

I don't see where the clock stopped, but it's been a long year.

The clock would stop when the foul is whistled on A4.

Re: False double foul.
 

That's an interesting interpretation. I'm not sure that I agree or disagree with it. But it does have me thinking. Is there a case book play to back it up?

Ooooooh!
 

I couldn't hear <u>that</u> whistle first. Fans were too loud. :)

If Team B had been in the bonus, what order should the free throws have occurred?

Doghead,
Fouls are penalized in order of occurrence.
You may have to discuss that with your partner to get a clear decision on who shoots first.
mick

Since the foul by A4 occurred first, B4 would shoot 1 & 1 if B was in the bonus. No players along the lane.

Then A1 would should his FT under normal FT conditions.

Re: Re: False double foul.
 

When I submitted my ruling I did not have a chance to comment further. As I stated before the two fouls are personal fouls, therefore the penalties are to be imposed for each foul. The rule book is not silent on this play. NHFS R6-S3-A3g and NCAA R6-S3-A1f state that the AP arrow is to be used when opponents commit simultaneous personal fouls. The only time that you have to be concerned about the order in which the fouls are to be penalized is when both teams are going to be shooting free throws. Just have the team that has the AP arrow shot its free throws last. Remember, this play involves personal fouls only and we do not care if the one or both of the fouls are common or not.

This type of foul situation is rare but should be handled in your pre-game conference because it is not the type you really you want to have to explain to both coaches.

Here are some good ways to handle this situation. 1) If both fouls are common fouls or the foul against the player with the ball is a foul in the act of shooting, let the foul on the ball be before the foul off the ball, making the foul off of the ball incidental contact because the ball was already dead. 2) If the foul off the ball was intentional or flagrant, let the foul off the ball be before the foul on the ball. You must always penalize an intentional or flagrant foul. Once again you are letting the other foul become incidental contact because the ball was dead. 3) Take play 1) and instead of a foul on the ball let it be a violation by the ball handler, let that violation be first, and handle the contact off of the ball the same way.

I am not advocating not treating the play as a false double foul. The correct way is to treat it as such. But some officials want to stay way from these type of weird situations and a good pregame on can solve problems like this one.

Re: Re: Re: False double foul.
 

Good thoughts, Mark.

After reading 6-3-3g, I think you're on solid ground with going to the arrow. I still don't think it's a FDF. Perhaps a definition is needed in Rule 4 for Simultaneous Fouls, just as there is for Simultaneous Technical Fouls. Simultaneous Fouls sounds like a better definition and is exactly what happened in the original play.

Good post, Mark.

I think the wording that makes this a False Double Foul is the phrase that says, " or does not have one or more of the above characteristics of a Double Foul."

Ah, but that's not what it says. It says,

A false double foul is a situation in which there are fouls by both teams, the second of which occurs before the clock is started following the first, and such that at least one of the attributes of a double foul is absent.

If the rule said OR, I would agree with you. But it says AND, which means all three criteria must be met. I like the sound of simultaneous fouls much better, don't you?

You're right abou the and/or thing, but why aren't all three of the criteria met? They couldn't have really been simultaneous, if you think about it cosmologically, so the FDF fits.

Besides there are no provisions in the rule book for Simultaneous Fouls. It's not dealt with at all so the FDF is the best choice from what's available, isn't it?

Simultaneous fouls - FYI
 

Simultaneous fouls are referenced in 6-3-3g.

Actually it is dealt with. While there is no definition of simultaneous fouls, it is referenced under 6-3-3g.

Does anyone have a rule book from '96-'97? I think that was the year that they put in the "AP on simultaneous fouls" rule. I do see from my '97-'98 book, that they had to add a definition for "Simultaneous T" because of a rule change in '96. I'd think that if they had added the "simultaneous T" definition, they would have put one in for "Simultaneous P" ...

Simultaneous Technicals were added in 97-98.

WWOOWWWW!! I am humbled by your rule book prowess, and I will certainly bring any future questions here! (no sarcasm intended)

I'm not sure about my prowess but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night! :)

Actually, I can't take credit. I had completely forgotten about this article about simultaneous fouls until Mark T. DeNucci mentioned it earlier in this post.

One of the best things about the Athletic Rules Study program is the Find feature found in the Rule Book help file. You can type in a phrase such as "Simultaneous Fouls" and the Find feature will tell you everywhere the phrase is found in the Rule Book. I copy the Rule Book and Cae Book to my hard drive and it's there anytime I want to pull something up. It makes a great study tool.

[Edited by BktBallRef on Jan 3rd, 2001 at 01:41 AM]

Cool!! My husband will be thrilled to know that there are yet more ways that I can spend time on basketball!