Possession arrow- IAABO Refresher Exam-2005

Smitty · #9 (**permalink**) Fri Oct 14, 2005, 10:09am

Quote:

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Quote:

Originally posted by Smitty

Quote:

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Quote:

Originally posted by Smitty

Quote:

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Quote:

Originally posted by David M
JR I know you are correct in this but since both actions are so close timewise I was thinking of calling this a double T instead of a false double foul.

I dunno....takes time for B1 to go get the ball, pick it up and throw it. The description sounded like 2 distinct and separate acts to me.

There is one advantage to a double T call imo though. A1 started the crap and B1 retaliated. A1 actually ends up gaining from the situation by getting the T possession after the FT's are over..... and I'm never fond of the instigator gaining anything out of a play like this. The double T would go to the POI, which would be an AP. That does negate A1 gaining even a minute advantage out of the situation.

Of course, if B1 woulda had the brains to just walk away from the push.......

I don't think you call the double T here. Team B had the advantage until B1 throws the ball. This is how fights get started. The acts happened separately. Penalize them both.

Doesn't a double T penalize them both also?

Of course, but I think having both team shoot free throws and allowing the retaliator to appear to be punished just a bit more (by losing posession) will send a bigger message not to retaliate in these situations. Just my opinion.

Um, that was kinda exactly what I was trying to get at above. The retaliator won't necessarily lose possession though. That depends on who has the arrow. It will make the arrow change eventually though if A does have the AP, so A really isn't gaining anything.

I meant after A shoots the free throws for the T B1 earned for retaliating. A will shoot the free throws and retain posession. That appears to punish the retaliation just a bit more, which I think makes sense. It's usually the retaliation that starts the fighting. Sends a message not to retaliate. Sort of. I don't know. It's so much easier to say these things here - not sure what I'd do if it really happens.