A1 being guarded by B1. A2 comes to set a screen on B1. Screen is illegal as A2 doesn't stop before contact. At the point of contact, B1 either pushes A2 to the side or blasts through the illegal screen by A2.

Call illegal screen on A2 and ignore B1's actions?

Call pushing foul on B1 and ignore A2's illegal screen?

Call a double foul?

Other options?

Z

I don't think you can ignore the illegal screen. Personal foul on A2. If B1's subsequent action is intentional (it doesn't sound flagrant), then you have a T on B1. If it's not intentional, ignore it. Have to see it to know whether or not it was worth a call.

How about if you judge it as intentional, but it happens before you can stop play? Sort of Bam-Bam. It seems a double foul would fit.

The action by B1 isn't subsequent; it's simultaneous. B1 initiated the contact on the illegal screen, either by pushing off or blasting through. How can you have a "T" for a contact foul during a live ball?

How can the comtact by B1 possibly be dead ball contact? :confused: B1 initiated or made the first contact, as posted by Z in his original post-QUOTE- "B1 either pushes A2 to the side or blasts through the illegal screen by A2"-UNQUOTE. Yes, the screen was illegal, but there's no call to be made until B1 makes contact, and B1 made contact while the ball was live- as per the original post.

Yeah, I can see that. Pushing through the illegal screen would be simultaneous. I was thinking that the screen happened and then the defender got mad and threw the screener.

But I can definitely see it as a double. I answered too quickly.

I got double.

Thanks for the responses. This scenario happened in a game last year (B1 pushed A2 to the side as A2 arrived with the illegal screen) and I went with the illegal screen at the time. I played it over in my head about 100 times on the way home from the game that night (not a close game, but the call just didn't feel right). I was thinking I'd probably go with a double foul next time... it just seems weird because the only double fouls I've ever had prior have always been post play.

Z

Illegal Screen
 

Zman says:

A2 sets "illegal screen" (can be no "illegal screen"w/o contact-no contact no call) so first contact must have been caused by A2. The whistle was for the illegal screen (the cause of the contact). Subsequent action by B needs to be judged on it's merits (intentional, flagrant, incidental, etc.)

If there was no contact prior to both players causing contact then it "sounds" like a double foul. It might have "looked" like something else.

The contact by A2 occurred at the same time that B1 pushed through. I'm going with double foul if I ever see that one again.

Z

Add this to the scenario
 

Would prior "tensions" between A2 and B1 influence how you call this?

Ponder this...

B1 has demonstrated marginal sportsmanship up to this point during previous plays; some with A2. Would anyone "up the ante" on his consequence, i.e. intentional foul (4-19-3... excessive contact with an opponent)?

Probably the best choice based on your description.....

Re: Add this to the scenario
 

And to further up the ante, if you do call an intentional personal foul on B1 along with a block on A2, what's the administration if both teams are in the bonus? If neither team is in the bonus? Same questions but with a flagrant personal foul on B1 instead?


[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Nov 19th, 2004 at 06:17 AM]

If contact is made and B2 pushes then the contact was the foul.
If contact isn't made and B2 pushes then the foul is on B2.
If....nevermind
I would NOT call a double foul. Any contact after a call deemed above and beyond incidental will get called.

Re: Re: Add this to the scenario
 

[/B][/QUOTE]And to further up the ante, if you do call an intentional personal foul on B1 along with a block on A2, what's the administration if both teams are in the bonus?

B1 will shoot bonus for the illegal screen,lanes cleared, A2 will shoot intentional foul, lanes cleared, Team A out of bounds at nearest spot of foul


If neither team is in the bonus?
B1 no shots, A2 shoots 2 for intentional foul out of bounds as spot nearest foul

Same questions but with a flagrant personal foul on B1 instead?

B1 sub, gets bonus free throws if in bonus if not, they get nothing, A2 still shoots but flagrant technical is brought in at mid court opposite the table


If you called a double foul, alternate possesion at spot!

Re: Re: Re: Add this to the scenario
 

And to further up the ante, if you do call an intentional personal foul on B1 along with a block on A2, what's the administration if both teams are in the bonus?

B1 will shoot bonus for the illegal screen,lanes cleared, A2 will shoot intentional foul, lanes cleared, Team A out of bounds at nearest spot of foul


If neither team is in the bonus?
B1 no shots, A2 shoots 2 for intentional foul out of bounds as spot nearest foul

Same questions but with a flagrant personal foul on B1 instead?

B1 sub, gets bonus free throws if in bonus if not, they get nothing, A2 still shoots but flagrant technical is brought in at mid court opposite the table


<font color = red>If you called a double foul, alternate possesion at spot!</font>[/B][/QUOTE]Probably should have been clearer. Let me re-phrase it.

Question is administration when you have a double personal foul when (1) one foul is intentional and both teams are in bonus, or both teams not in bonus (2) same scenario but with a flagrant personal foul being one of the double fouls instead.

i guess you would still call it a double foul, but because intentional has a different penalty...2 shots and ball..wouldn't be like an ordinary double foul, so would B1 still shoot?? since it's a double foul i'm thinking yes, but i have been wrong before,

good question?

whatever the ruling is it would still be same for flagrant, except you would have an ejection?

Help!!!

Re: Re: Re: Add this to the scenario
 

I believe that a flagrant personal foul is still inbounded at the point of incident. Correct?

As I read this, A's actions caused the contact. Single foul on A2, unless B1's actions are intentional or flagrnat (not likely).

that is really the question.... if you feel it's intentional, do you call a double foul??? or a illegal screen on A2 and then intentional on B1?? what would be the administration penalties for free throws?? bonus or not?

A handy little reference is always at the end of Rule 10- "Summary of Penalties for All Fouls". It can save you a whole bunch of digging through the rules sometimes.

Re:#1(c)-NOTE in this summary- <i>"If one or both fouls of a double personal foul are flagrant, no free throws are awarded. Any player who commits a flagrant foul is disqualified".</i>

That's how I called it at the time Bob, but in retrospect I really did a lot of second-guessing. Yeah, A2 was coming to set an illegal screen and didn't stop short of contact. But at the same time that A2 arrived, B1 was pushing A2 to the side. By only calling the illegal screen, I ignored the illegal action by B1 (which did not fit my definition of intentional or flagrant). Not that it matters, but as you can imagine, the A coach saw the push by B and wanted that. I couldn't even say, "the bad screen happened first coach" because that wasn't true. It's an interesting one to me.

Z

"If your player had been legal, that's what I would have called."