Foul and T

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Hotlink501

Would not a false double foul be a common foul on both teams when at least one component is missing of a double foul. I have not read where an intentional foul is a false double foul. By definition alone, dead ball automatically makes it an intentional foul and not a false double foul, therefor the person foulded would have to shoot the freethrows. Show me what I'm reading wrong into this situation.

What rulebook are you reading? There's no definition in any rule book that I know of stating that the dead ball makes it an intentional foul. The second foul doesn't have to be any specified or particular kind, and it doesn't have to occur during a dead ball either. The second foul can be any type of personal or technical foul, and that foul just has to occur sometime before the clock starts after the first foul was called to make it part of a "false double" foul. AAMF, the first foul doesn't have to be a certain type either. It could be personal or technical too, and could also be any of the different types of personal and technical fouls also.

[Hotlink501]

Well, I do believe that I am reading the NFHS rulebook for the 2004-05 season. Rule 10.3.8 states, " Intentionally or flarantly contacting an opponent when the ball is dead and such contact is not a personal foul,". I dont know about your definition, whatever rulebook you have not been reading, but throwing an elbow when the ball is dead in retaliation, is in no way considered a personal foul. That is at the least, intentional if not flagrant.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Hotlink501

(1) Would not a false double foul be a common foul on both teams when at least one component is missing of a double foul.

(2) By definition alone, dead ball automatically makes it an intentional foul and not a false double foul, therefor the person foulded would have to shoot the freethrows.

Lemme try again:

(1) No, they do not have to be common fouls on both teams. Neither one of the fouls has to be a common foul. They can be any combination of any type of foul by either team--i.e. common foul, intentional personal foul, flagrant personal foul, player control foul, technical foul, intentional technical foul, flagrant technical foul or a team technical foul.

(2) No, by definition a dead ball does not automatically make it an intentional foul. A dead ball foul could be a technical foul, an intentional technical foul, a flagrant technical foul or a team technical foul. Intentional fouls can be either personal or technical in nature.

The point is that it doesn't matter what kind of foul is called- or whether it is the first or second foul foul called. All that matters is that the fouls are called in the order outlined in the definition of a false double foul. One foul of any kind is called. Then, before the clock starts again, another foul of any kind is called. You penalize each foul in the the order that they occur. That's a false double foul.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Hotlink501

but throwing an elbow when the ball is dead in retaliation, is in no way considered a personal foul. That is at the least, intentional if not flagrant.

Yes, it's intentional, or flagrant. But, It's an intetnional (or flagrant) TECHNICAL, not an intentional or flagrant PERSONAL foul (conact while the ball is dead is ignored unless it's intentional or flagrant (or ariborne shooter), in which case it's a technical foul).

Since it's a technical foul, any eligible team B member can shoot the throws.

If the contact had been while the ball was live, it would be a personl foul (whether common, intentional or flagrant). In that instance, B1 would have to shoot the throws.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Dan and Mark, I believe that there is no such thing as an intentional T in the women's game. I don't know how it would be handled, but I'm pretty sure that the women's side doesn't use the "intentional T" designation.

Chuck, I believe I ended my post with the words "NCAA men".

You should assume by "NCAA men" I mean my interpretation applies to NCAA men's rules. Not NCAA women's rules.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
Chuck, I believe I ended my post with the words "NCAA men".

I know that. I was offering it more as a "point of information" than as a correction. Since Mark was addressing men's and women's rules, and you only addressed men's rules, I just thought I would make it clear that the application was different on the women's side. Didn't seem like such a dumb idea at the time. . .

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
There's no definition in any rule book that I know of stating that the dead ball makes it an intentional foul.

Point of information. In NCAA men's rules, dead ball contact is an intentional technical. It is, of course, still possible to have a direct technical for unsporting conduct (which would not be an intentional technical) during a dead ball.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

I know that. I was offering it more as a "point of information" than as a correction. Since Mark was addressing men's and women's rules, and you only addressed men's rules, I just thought I would make it clear that the application was different on the women's side. Didn't seem like such a dumb idea at the time. . .

No no, it wasn't a dumb idea, it was a great idea! (Don't want to upset any of the folks who wander by here humming "Give Peace a Chance".)

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Point of information. In NCAA men's rules, dead ball contact is an intentional technical. It is, of course, still possible to have a direct technical for unsporting conduct (which would not be an intentional technical) during a dead ball.

Point of information. Under NCAA men's rules, dead ball contact can also be called a flagrant technical foul too. True? That was my point. There are other options other than always having an intentional technical foul.