I was working a two-man system in a girls' game tonight with a friend of mine. He is a quality official and has worked 3 state championships so far, but has never been really strong on the rules. He came to me last season and expressed his desire to improve his rules knowledge in order to help his chances of working college games, so we have been spending some time covering case book-type plays over a few beers.
Anyway, it paid off tonight. He was lead and had A1 drive down the middle of the lane. She jumped and was fouled across the arms by B1 while in the act of shooting. At this point I heard his whistle, so I knew what he had. I then observed A1 plow over B2 who had LGP under the basket. (NFHS rules) The contact was hard, sending both players to the floor, and the defender took it squarely in the chest.
The try was not successful.
At this moment I thought, I can't call that because he's already called a foul on the defense and it would just make a mess of things. Surprise! I then heard his whistle again, and he called the PC. "Great call, partner!" is what went through my mind.
He now comes off the end line and we meet at the top of the key. He says, "False double, now what do we do?" :)
In this summer league, we award one point and shoot one FT for fouls committed against a shooter if the try is unsuccessful. I told him that we penalize each in order, so we give Gold one point and one shot with no one on the lane and then award the ball OOB to Blue. I then gave a quick run down to the table of what I wanted done score- and foul-wise, so that both coaches could hear and on we went. It really went quite smoothly, and this made me realize that this call could and should be made without causing too much of a stir, which was why I was hesitant to call it when it happened. Thankfully, my partner stepped up.
After the game, I told him what a great call he had made, and that I was really pleased that he knew it was a false double. Of course, I shared my thought process during the play with him and added that I should have had the second foul for him, since it needed to be called, and that I wouldn't let him down like that again.
He responded by telling me that he even knew to count the basket if it had been made! He just wasn't sure about the administration of everything, so he wanted to check with me.
This was the first time I had ever seen this call made by a single official, and I'm glad he did it because he saved me.
In the end, I think I learned more on this play than he did.

nice

The basket does not count on the false double 4.19.8 situation A.

You're correct. Thanks for pointing that out.
Thank goodness the shot didn't go in during the game.

My partner was obviously confused by the case book play above the one you cited, 4.19.7 C, and sadly he even convinced me! I guess I could use even more brushing up than I thought! New memory rule: ONLY COUNT THE BASKET ON A DOUBLE FOUL.

I'm working with my buddy again this weekend, and I'll pass this tidbit along.

Remember a player control foul on the airborn shooter will always negate the shot in FED regardless of any other fouls.

This is also true in NCAA rules. (stir, stir, stir. . . :) )

In NCAA Wimmen's rules too?

Yes, I read your disclaimer.

Yup. In fact, in some sense this is true only in NCAAW. That's because a foul by an airborne shooter in NCAAM is not PC.

Your statement may be a bit of an oversimplification. While it is in fact correct, you really have to make sure that you do actually have a player control foul.

What I mean by that is what looks like a PC may technically not be a PC and then your rule of thumb could easily be misapplied.

For example, when two fouls make a double foul, they lose their individual features and are treated as a totally new animal, which has it's own specific penalty. (This is NOT the case for a False Double foul.) If you read 4.19.7C, you will see how many people could be mislead by your above statement. The first sentence of the ruling says, "Even though airborne shooter A1 committed a charging foul, it is not a player-control foul because the two fouls result in a double personal foul." Therefore, an official would be wrong to negate a shot for this foul.

My prior knowledge of that sentence actually tricked me in the post-game discussion with my partner. Simply because I knew that there is a time when a player commits what appears to be a PC and the basket DOES count. I just confused this case book play with the one blindzebra cited.
As can be seen from that play, each foul of the false double is penalized separately and retains the all penalties that we normally associate with it, specifically the PC cancelling a made goal.

Looking back on that post-game, I can really understand what some coaches go through in a game. Most of them know just enough rules to get them into trouble. They read a paragraph, remember part of it, and are sure they are right about the rule. Only later do they find out that what they knew doesn't apply to the situation in question.

So, I find myself truly grateful to blindzebra for correcting me. I would much rather have to go to an official friend of mine and tell him that I was mistaken in our post-game, than to have really embarrassed myself by screwing up a game.

Aww, that was hardly any fun at all. Lotto knew what I was getting at right away. (Guess I shoulda used an analogy.) My point was simply that in any ruleset, if there's a PC foul, the basket can't be scored. In NCAA men's, if the shot is released before the contact, then there is no player control and it's a common foul against the player who shot the ball. So no PC foul in this sitch.

But if it is a PC foul, then no basket can be scored.

This means an airborne shooter after the shot is away, correct? (Not that it matters, since I'll never do NCAAM anyway...)

Nevada -- Doesn't it feel great when someone you help gets better? At my camp last year there was a guy who really needed work, but he learned a lot. This year, he came to my 3-person clinics, and was invited to the college camp I went to. He got all kinds of recognition and awards, and he'll probably get college games in a year if not this fall. I almost felt like it was me moving up so fast. So to both you AND your friend I say, WAY TO GO!!

Before the shot is away (ie he released the ball on a try) he's simply an airborne player, not an airborne shooter, by definition.

Juulie, for NCAA men's. . .

Jump, crash, release, ball goes in = PC, no basket, no FTs for B1.

Jump, release, crash, ball goes in = common foul, basket counts, B1 shoots bonus if applicable.

This is actually more consistent with the rest of the rules about player and team control, but harder to officiate. And as Dan pointed out a scant 2 minutes ago, there's no "airborne shooter" rule in NCAA men's.

Uhhhhm, no, I'm not sure that's what I meant to point out a mere 5 minutes ago.

All I pointed out in reponse to Juulie's question was by definition the player is not an airborne shooter before he shoots.

As you pointed out slightly less than 5 hours ago under ncaam the PC foul does not apply to the airborne shooter.

Let's modify the second foul. No LGP was established and a blocking foul called. If in bonus, does shooter get the two from the first hack, and the bonus throws?

Well, it's true anyway. You might as well take credit for it. ;)

Shooter is still in the act of shooting...bonus will not matter. This is either a multiple foul or a false multiple foul depending on the time seperation. I'd lean towards a multiple since I don't think the administration of two independant fouls against the same shooter is defined unless they're a multiple.

However, unless both fouls are extreme, ignoring one (usually the 2nd) is the standard...even in the case when the 2nd player had LGP.

Well, no, it's not true.

NCAAM has the airborne shooter rule, it's identical to ncaaw. 4.1.

As you pointed out it's the PC rule that's different.

Well, no, it's not true.

NCAAM has the airborne shooter rule, it's identical to ncaaw. 4.1.[/B][/QUOTE]
They both define an airborne shooter, I'll grant you that. I was wording it the same way the chart of rules differences does it.

Airborne shooter NFHS: In air after release of try or tap; NCAA Men: No rule.

We're saying the same thing from different angles, I think.

Certainly does. The two of us actually went to a couple of camps together in CA this summer and my friend got picked-up for a men's JC league. I really believe that he has what it takes to make D-1.

Camron,
This is why I didn't blow the whistle during the game. However, after going through the experience I have now changed my mind about this play. I now firmly believe that the 2nd foul should be called. I learned that it wasn't a big deal when we did it, and it is afterall the correct call.
Put me in the camp that votes not to ignore that second foul.

BTW, if the 2nd foul is a block, the play becomes a false multiple foul and each foul carries its own penalty, just like a false double, so the shooter would get FOUR shots for an unsuccessful try or the basket and TWO shots (one for each foul) if the goal was made.

Sounds to me like this could be called a multiple foul (not false) since the fouls happened at approximately the same time. In that case, the shooter would get 2 FTs whether or not the try was successful.

This would NOT be a false multiple. It would be a multiple. As Lotto said, they are approximately at the same time. There is no way that the intent is to give A1 4 shots for a 2 missed 2 point try.

The false multiple would be when B1 fouls A1 on the shot. Then, during/after the FT but before the clock starts, B2 fouls A1.

There is no way that the intent is to give A1 4 shots for a missed 2 point try.

[/B][/QUOTE]Agree with that completely.

It looks like all of us are going to learn something during this thread because FOUR FTs is exactly what the NFHS wants on this play. It is stated directly in the case book.

"FALSE MULTIPLE FOUL
4.19.11 Situation: B1 fouls airborne A1 who is in the act of shooting. Before airborne shooter A1 returns to the floor, he/she is fouled by B2 who has moved into A1's landing area. The ball: (a) does; or (b) does not, enter the basket. RULING: This is a false multiple foul and each foul carries its own penalty. In (a), the goal is counted and A1 is awarded on free throw for each foul. In (b), A1 is awarded two free throws for each foul. (10-6 Pen 5a; 7)"

It's not often that JR forgets about a case book play! He's usually the one quoting them to us. ;)

It's not often that JR forgets about a case book play! He's usually the one quoting them to us. ;)
[/B][/QUOTE]Dumb rule. :D

Good catch, Nevada.

Well, well, I stand corrected. :D

Is it really the opinion of those involved with this thread to call both of these fouls? I can't picture the play or the reason for doing anything besides calling the first foul. It seems to me that this could be called often but it isn't. There are many times when a shooter gets fouled by multiple teammates and one foul is called. Is the play you are talking about different?

Just another what-if rules thingy conversation, Tomegun. You're right. You will never, ever see very many multiple fouls called. If any. They certainly can be called by rule though.

Oh, I thought Nevada had this happen in a game. I know Nevada and he is good with the rules. I will not say he is a "rules guy" because over time others have given that term the meaning of someone who only knows the rules but can't apply them as well. I think it should be a compliment when an official thinks another official knows the rules.

I know it is in the case book, but the only way I would ever call a multiple foul is if a player got blasted (deserving an intentional) by two players at the same time. Any other time... nope dont think so... Too difficult to explain, administer, and I think anyone in my association ever called one they would be relegated to 9th grade ball forever

I used to think that the multiple foul should not be called but last night made me think differently.

- A1 was driving along the endline
- A1 picked up his dribble to start a shot
- B1 hacked his arm (which is when I blew my whistle)
- A1 then continued with his shot and while in the air (with the ball still in his hands) B2 fouled him to the point that he couldn't get the shot off.

I decided to just call the first foul and we proceeded to administer 2 free throws. After thinking about it last night I figured that I should have called a false multiple foul because he could have made the shot and then had one FT attempt (Max: 3pts) if B2 didn't foul him. Because I did not call the false multiple foul I am penalizing the offense with only 2 FTs (Max: 2pts). Of course by calling the false multiple I'm giving the offense one extra possible point (Max: 4pts).

I agree with Nevadaref by voting not to ignore that second foul.

I've had multiple fouls happen before when a player went up for a shot and opponents on both sides hit the shooters left and right arm at the same exact time. I handled that situation by just picking one of the two players and only calling one foul. I don't see the reason in giving the shooter 4 FT in that situation, but I do in the false multiple situation.

Rather than posting my own thoughts on these calls, let me suggest an exercise for everyone on this thread:

1) Watch as many NCAA games on TV this upcoming season as possible.

2) Take note every time a false double or false multiple foul is called in these games.

3) Strive to call that many in your games the next season.

:)

What you described is a multiple foul, not a false multiple.
A false multiple would be a foul by B1, non-shooting, B2 then fouls A3 before the throw in ends.

Blindzebra,
Check out Nevada's reference to the case book play on page two of this thread. It is a false multiple, by rule. 4 shots.

Brad, am I missing something here? False double fouls and false multiple fouls happen all the time in NCAA and high school games. They're just a normal, everyday call, and aren't that special.

Examples are:
1) Foul by B1. Before the free throw(s) for the foul or the throw-in after the free throws are over and the clock has started, an A player commits a foul(personal or technical). This is a false double foul.
2) Foul by B1. Before the free throw(s) for the foul or the throw-in after the free throws are over and the clock is started, another B player commits a foul(personal or technical). This is a false multiple foul.

Fairly common,imo. You don't see double fouls or (certainly) multiple fouls very often though.

Those examples are not the play that we are discussing.

How many times have you seen two different, opposing fouls called on the same play to the basket?!?

Your post referred to how often that you see false double or false multiple fouls in NCAA games. It didn't differentiate as to the type of false double or multiple foul. You may not see a certain, specific example of the one mentioned in this thread that often, but generic false double and false multiple fouls are fairly common in NCAA or NFHS games. Any time that someone from either team commits a foul along the lane line during a free throw, you have either a false double or a false multiple foul. That was my point.

To answer your question though, in 45 years I've never seen a false multiple foul called that consisted of 2 personal fouls by teammates on an airborne shooter, and I've seen one multiple foul called on 2 teammates fouling an opposing player at the same time. I thought that the multiple foul was a good call (my partner made it) because it looked like the 2 defenders deliberately went after a dribbler and both made solid contact on him at the same time.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Jul 13th, 2004 at 04:16 PM]

They really need to change that, because it is wrong.

How is there a difference between getting hit BAM-BAM versus
BAM--BAM? The ball is still live in both cases. You could have two hard hits on the shooter in the first case play for one shot each, but you get two shots each in the second where you may have less contact?

It also is awarding FOUR FTs on a missed 3pt shot in the first case, and if I'm reading it correctly, each foul carries it's own penalty, you could shoot SIX FTs on a missed 3pt shot under a false multiple.

No wonder it never gets called.:D

Also, false multiples are never only 4 shots -- you are going to shoot 6 shots total.

<small><i>The last two for the tech you call on the coach after he goes ballistic on you!</i></small>

I understand your reason Brad for not calling a false multiple (in my example), which is b/c it is not commonly called. My thinking was that if a player gets fouled and then tries to complete the play than that player should have the same rights to finishing his shot as he did prior to the first foul.

The best way to avoid my situation is to let the play develop and then call the foul. When I blew my whistle on the first foul, I was committed to making that call. After my first whistle another foul happened that directly effected the shooter's attempt at scoring a goal. I felt that I should have called that second foul for that reason. I usually let the play develop but B1 smacked A1's arm pretty hard so that's why I called it right away.

I guess this all comes down to the individual referee's preference or how their assigner/association wants them to call it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

By the way just because a multiple doesn't happen all the time for you shouldn't mean that my girl can't enjoy it when it does. I guess for Brad's significant other it would be a false multiple. :D

Very well stated! You also might have to call the ambulance when the coach has a heart attack!


Alright I'll bite, what does your website stand for? :confused:

It's not that I don't want to call it because it doesn't get called very often. Plenty of things don't get called often, but need to be called when they happen -- intentional / flagrant fouls, etc.

I don't want to call it because it is #23 of <a href="http://shop.officiating.com/x/product/51ways">51 Ways to Ruin a Baseball Game</a> -- "Make an unusual call on a routine play"

(Yes, I realize that we are talking basketball, not baseball, but MANY of the 51 Ways equally apply to all sports!)

Why do this to yourself? Call the foul and put the guy on the line. NO coach, fan, or player is going to even THINK that two fouls should be called. Everyone will be happy and there will be no protest and the game will go on without issue. Don't put yourself in a bad situation just so that you can be "right" according to a super-analytical interpretation of the rules.

<hr>
As far as the website, I assume that you are asking about batt.cc? The cc stands for Cocos Islands, which are located in Asia near Indonesia. (Each country in the world has its own two-letter top-level domain -- the US's is .us)

<img src="http://www.cocos-tourism.cc/images/location/lloc.gif">

I got the batt.cc because the .com and .net and .org were taken.

You don't have to live in the Cocos Islands to use .cc, but judging by this photo I might want to!

<img src="http://www.cocos-tourism.cc/images/lpic0.gif">

Actually I was wondering why the only thing on the website was "BATT.CC" I thought maybe it was the new thing in web design ..... simplicity :)

I figured it stood for Brad Against Tantrums That Coaches Cause
or Brad Against Technicals That Coaches Create
or something along that line. It's hard to come up with something with 2 Ts & 2 Cs next to each other :)

Oh yeah -- the "Batt" is my last name :)

It's simple because I have plenty of other websites to keep up to date! :)

Thanks, my man. BTW, my opinion is that an official who is well-versed in the rules should use them to get out of a tough situation, not put himself into one.
Although, I have balance that with my belief that a top-notch official is one who has the strength and conviction to make the right call not just the popular one.
Judgment, game management, and rules knowledge must all be part of the package. Striking the proper balance amongst the three and timing will separate the good from the best.

This is a great sentence. Thanks for it!



What, PRESENCE doesn't count for anything?!? :p

Presence can be the difference between getting hired or not. Some evaluators will say if an official has presence and can run the floor they can teach the rest.