Double foul administration

[JoeT]

Hello! I am a longtime coach, but a new referee. (I read a post where somebody suggested that coaches often don't know the rules as well as they should. I fell into that camp, I'm afraid.)

Here's my question:
Team A has the ball in their frontcourt. Team B is over the foul limit. The possession arrow points to team B. A double foul is called on A1 and B1 (away from the ball).

Is A awarded the penalty free throws?

If so, do the non-shooting players vacate the free throw area since B will get the ball to resume play?

Forgive me if this is a painfully obvious question. I couldn't find it in the rules.

Joe

[ken roberts]

See 4-19-7a Note...AP arrow with no free throws.

[b_silliman]

Coach (Referee) Joe:

In the back of the Federation rulebook there is a section which decribes how many free throws for each type of foul. It is a valuable tool for learning the correct number of throws.

In spite of what many people think (coaches) every conceivable situation is covered in the rulebook and the casebook. Book learning is very important for the new official. When the rules are learned backwards and forwards, then coupled with strong use of proper mechanics will give you a tremendous step toward becoming a good official.

Then, you have to learn what to call and what to pass on. At that time you are on the road to becoming a great official.

[Mark Padgett]

[quote]Originally posted by b_silliman on 12-16-1999 01:11 AM
Coach (Referee) Joe:
"In spite of what many people think (coaches) every conceivable situation is covered in the rulebook and the casebook."

Not really. What about the controversy surrounding the call in this situation? A1 to inbound on spot throw-in. A1 releases the ball toward the court, but before it crosses the boundary line, B1 reaches across the boundary and touches the ball.

Bill Topp, in Referee Magazine, says it is a no-call. Howard Mayo of the NF rules committee says it is a technical foul on B1 and Dick Knox, Chairman of the NF rules committee says it is a violation by B1.

According to a strict dictionary definition of the word "touch" as it appears in NF rule 9-2-pen 3 and reiterated in NF 10-3-12, Howard Mayo is correct. I guess we are supposed to flip a three-headed coin. I have asked Bill Topp to get a clarification from the NF and publish it in Referee.

[bob jenkins]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mark Padgett on 12-16-1999 01:42 AM
I have asked Bill Topp to get a clarification from the NF and publish it in Referee.

---

It would be great if they would do that. I've asked before on similar issues (I think they had to do with baseball), and the response was "check with your state interpreter". Gee, thanks.

[Richard Kreimer]

[quote]Originally posted by bob jenkins on 12-16-1999 09:54 AM
It would be great if they would do that. I've asked before on similar issues (I think they had to do with baseball), and the response was "check with your state interpreter". Gee, thanks.

That could be a disaster, 50 different interpretations.