After a made basket by Team B, A1 posesses the ball OOB and throws to A2 who is also still OOB, B1 reaches and deflects the OOB pass between A1 and A2....I have an indirect technical foul on B1. I award two free throws to Team A but then what.....

1) Does Team A get the ball back at the point of interruption, back down under Team B basket?

2) Do I notify the scorer that the T was "indirect" so that they note it accordingly in the T-Foul count against B1?

I beleive that resumption of play is back at the POI.

You cannot have an indirect on a player.

I do not know if this is a direct T or not, but I do know that it is not an indirect T.

If the T is the proper penalty, then you have 2 free throws and possession at half.

If it is a legal play, then either B intercepts the pass or he knocks it out of bounds.

Mike

It is for sure an indirect Tech....

Art. 5. Until the thrown-in ball crosses the plane of the sideline or end line:
a. The thrower-in shall not leave a designated spot;
b. No opponent of the thrower-in shall have any part of his or her person over the inside plane of the sideline or end line;

Example:

A.R. 17. B1 makes contact with the ball being passed between A1 and A2 while they are out of bounds. (See Rule 7-5.8.) RULING: A defensive player shall not interfere with the ball not yet successfully thrown in. Indirect technical foul on B1.

I now see on the Foul/Penalty Chart that an indirect T resumes at the POI.

http://www.ncaa.org/library/rules/20...ball_rules.pdf

Rob, what ruleset are we talking about here? If we're talking FED, then you have a direct technical charged to B1, with no indirect charged to the coach. Team A gets 2 FTs and the ball at midcourt.

If we're talking NCAA (men's), you have an indirect technical against B1 (again, no indirect to the coach). The T does not count toward the bonus or to B1's total of 5 personal/technical fouls for disqualification. Team A gets 2 FTs and then they get the ball at the POI, anywhere along the endline.

It's a technical, two shots for any team A player, and the ball at mid-court.

I can't remember off-hand if its a team tech only or a technical against the player.

Well, I got complacent because I've been the first for several times. Rested on my laurels, and they turned out to be holly. OUCH!

Ah, ok. Since you're quoting AR's, you're talking about NCAA. That clears things up a little.

Thanks CHUCK, I was intending to get the FED ruling but did not have access and was thinking that NCAA would be same....I'll note the clarification.

I seem to recall this is a team technical, not a player technical. I remember this specifically because one time last season my partner ended up tossing a girl for doing this twice in a game and we both thought it was the right call to T her directly. But then I went home and looked it up and saw that reaching through the plane and touching the ball during a throw-in was a team T and not charged to a player.

Dave look at 10-3-12, which is under Player Technical. I think it's on the player.

I don't have my books with me today, but I'll check it out. Maybe it was just reaching through the plane after the first warning that's a Team T. I think that might have been it - she reached through and was warned, then did it twice more during the game. Is that one a Team T?

If you're working NCAA, please do!

I thought a qualification to be a scorer for collage ball was to be a mind reader! :)

The reaching through the plane (after the first warning) is a team T while touching the ball through the plane is an individual T.

Why? The plane violation takes two violations to become a T. The two parts may or may not be commited by the same person and, even if they were, there is no tracking of that information. The touching of the ball is an individual act since it automatically draws a T without a prerequisite.

This is a player T in FED. Counted just as if he popped off to the ref or slammed the ball on the floor.
I hit a kid with this a few years ago, and he later got a 2nd T for unsportsmanlike conduct.
I called the office to report it, and they said he wouldn't get suspended because one of the T's was not really an unsportsmanlike T. I was relieved.

I agree with that conclusion and had one like that similar in the past. The game suspension should only be used for unsportsmanlike acts, not simply two T's.

Imagine a player who gets a T to start the game because they're wearing an illegal jersey. Later, they get blood on it and leave the game. Without notifying the officials or the table, they change to a clean shirt and come back into the game. The commit a foul and it is discovered that they changed numbers. Another T.

You may not actually call these T's but for the sake of argument, let's assume they get called. By the letter of some state's rules, this would create a suspension for the player when in reality, neither is suspension worthy.

Still working on that one, Stan!!

I must say, I had to do a lot of it at the beginning of this season. Some of the men's officials were starting the 'walk and talk' and basically mumbled fouls in my direction. Maybe the women's NCAA staff needs to give these guys some pointers.

I have actually asked the asst. director of our state association about this. He told me that two Ts and a disqualification from a game would result in an automatic suspension for the next game no matter whether the Ts were behavior related or not.
I originally didn't believe this was proper, but after I had some time to think about this for a while, I have concluded that this is the correct stance to take.
To explain why I have two reasons:
1)
I had a game in which a player was T'd by my partner in the 1Q for complaining about his calls. In the 2Q this player broke the throw-in plane and hit the ball while it was still in the thrower's hands. I gave him his second T of the game. This player was DQ'd and had to sit out the following game.
While some may feel that this is harsh, I look at it from the other side. This kid is actually getting a better lesson on why he should not be yapping at the officials. If he hadn't received that first T for his mouth, he wouldn't be sitting at all.
2)
Lastly, I'll state that the reason interfering with the throw-in is a T is because it is considered unsporting behavior. The game is supposed to be a sporting contest and certain acts in the game are clearly not in the spirit of fair play. The throw-in example is one, and the same is true of changing your jersey and not informing the officials/scorer or a pre-game dunk (showing off or intimidating the other team).

In fact, I would have to check, but I think that all player technicals could well be considered unsporting behavior.

Therefore, those who say that the kid should not be suspended for a game would have to answer this point convincingly before I would join their ranks again.

Nevada, your point #1 is dealt with by the fact that the player is sitting down for the rest of the game following the 2nd T. If he hadn't popped off early in the game, he'd still be playing at the end. So, he's already got an extra punishment.
Your first point is one of opinion, and I'm not prepared to argue either way. Personally, I think there is a line between game behavior that results in Ts (slapping the ball while still OOB on a throw-in or even stepping OOB on purpose to avoid a screen) and unsportsmanlike behavior (like popping off to a ref and some dead ball contact). Isn't a player entering unbeckoned a player T as well? Personally, I like that my state will differentiate here. But, it's not my call, so I'll go with whatever they decide.

Adam

In my example the changing of the shirt was simply to get rid of a bloody shirt and the failure to notify was only an oversight (by the coach), not an effort to confuse anyone (assume the player involved had a head of hair like Carrot Top and was 6'8" while everyone else on both teams looked like Danny Devito.)

I believe there are effectively two classes of technical fouls: behavior related fouls and tangential fouls (illegal number/jersey, etc.) I can't see pinning a T that the kid has no control over on them individually when considering suspensions.

Nevada
I think it is a huge stretch to say that the reaching through the plane T is for unsportsmanlike behavior. It exists to prevent an unsportsmanlike delay in the agme by the defense, but it is not in and of itself unsporting. It is an act that occurs in an instant as part of playing the game. Dissension, taunting, talking trash, profanity - diffferent type of action altogether.

And yes, you could have a player learn something from the first T by suspending for the second T. But then again, you could have a player learn from the first T by suspending for the first T, if that was what the rule was intended to do.

So no, I don't think all Ts are unsporting, I don't think all Ts should result in a suspension. I hope that most states distinguish between types of Ts.