Right there in the Case Book comment to 6.7! It specifies ONLY personal or technical fouls. Logically, this must tell you that continuous motion does NOT apply to all of the other types of fouls. All of the different types of fouls are listed in 4-19. A double foul is an entirely different animal. Even though it may consist of two personal fouls, it is not a personal foul. Many people are unclear on that point.

That is quite true. And since it is not a PC, but something totally different the ball does not become dead. One thing that this case book play does is demonstrate that the basket counts if a double foul occurs WHILE A TRY IS IN FLIGHT. That is why I cited it.

The only other reference I can find is 6-7 Exception 3 (following Art. 9). It is not any clearer than what I have already told you though. The language used there is "A foul committed by any opponent..."
Since a double foul is not a foul by an opponent, it is a foul committed by both teams, this exception wouldn't apply and the ball becomes dead per 6-7-7.
That is the best I can do for ya. Perhaps the NFHS should issue one of its wonderful "clarifications" on this.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nevadaref
Right there in the Case Book comment to 6.7! It specifies ONLY personal or technical fouls. Logically, this must tell you that continuous motion does NOT apply to all of the other types of fouls. All of the different types of fouls are listed in 4-19. A double foul is an entirely different animal. Even though it may consist of two personal fouls, it is not a personal foul. Many people are unclear on that point.

Logically, this does not follow. A double foul is two personal fouls or two technical fouls. It is not a different type of foul than specified in 6.7, just two of them. I defer to your experience, but this is another instance of poor writing on Fed's part.

i have to agree, double foul is just 2 personals
 

not a different type of foul, just happens to be two of them, or that is how i would see it! I think it is definitely a bad way to be written though.

Thanks Lotto. I just received my 2005 Rule Book. You nailed it.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jimgolf

Quote:

Originally posted by Nevadaref Right there in the Case Book comment to 6.7! It specifies ONLY personal or technical fouls. Logically, this must tell you that continuous motion does NOT apply to all of the other types of fouls. All of the different types of fouls are listed in 4-19. A double foul is an entirely different animal. Even though it may consist of two personal fouls, it is not a personal foul. Many people are unclear on that point. Logically, this does not follow. A double foul is two personal fouls or two technical fouls. It is not a different type of foul than specified in 6.7, just two of them. I defer to your experience, but this is another instance of poor writing on Fed's part.

It may not seem logical but this is the NFHS. The reason that a double foul must be considered a different type of foul is due to a rule change quite a while ago which dramatically altered the penalty phase.
Back in the day if Team A had committed 8 fouls in the half while Team B had only committed 4, and a double personal foul was called, then Team B would go shoot 1-and-1. If both teams were in the bonus, I think, both teams shot FTs.
Today the NFHS rule is that NO FTs are awarded on double personal or double technical fouls and possession is awarded by using the arrow.
So you can see why you cannot just consider a double foul to be two personal fouls. The penalty phase is entirely different.