Question: T or F

After a double technical foul, the alternating-possession throw-in spot is determined by the location of the ball when the fouls occured.

Case Book *4.19.8
A1 and B1 foul one another at approximately the same time. The contact occurs during: (b)a dead-ball situation.
RULING: It is a double technical foul. No free throws are awaraded and play resumes at the point of interruption. (4-36)

Rule Book 4-36-2c
Play shall be resumed by:
c. An alternating-possession throw-in when the point of interruption is such that neither team is in control...

NFHS...dead ball, double technical, no team in control.

Please give example of when a team would be in control during a dead ball.

all this is saying
 

is that lets say you call an out of bounds and team A is getting the ball back -- lets say after you call the OOB about a second or 2 later A1 and B1 who were battling for position push/pull each other and you would normally have a double foul -- but since the ball is dead you have a double tech -- the ball was still going to go to team A so there is no need to go to the arrow -- give A the ball and play ball.

The statement is true. An AP throw-in is always from the spot nearest the ball. See 6-4-2.

just on the short question I would say false there would be no AP throw-in, go straight to POI. your question did not specify whether the ball was dead or not.

[Edited by PAULK1 on Oct 29th, 2005 at 11:45 PM]

There's not enough information here to answer the question. What was the status of the ball when the official called the double T?

If one team had control, then there is no AP throw-in, as the ball is simply awarded back to the team in control at the spot nearest to the ball.

If an unsuccessful try was in flight when the official called the double T, then play would be resumed with an AP throw-in.

The reason you are confused here is that you stopped quoting the rule too soon. 4-36-2c says ". . .when neither team is in control and no goal, infraction, nor end of quarter/extra period is involved." Yes, the ball is dead, but if there's an infraction (foul or traveling violation, for example), goal, or end of period, then we know who is going to get the ball next. And that's where we resume.

So, for example, B1 fouls A1 as A1 releases a try for goal. Official sounds the whistle for the personal foul. The try is unsuccessful. After the ball has become dead, A1 and B1 curse at each other. Official calls a double technical foul.

So now what? The ball is dead with neither team in control. What's the POI? Well, b/c there was an infraction (B1's personal foul), we know that A1 would have had control if the double T had not occured. Therefore, we resume by awarding A1 2 FTs with players lined up along the lane and continue the game as after any "normal" FTs.

Make sense?

Good Job Chuck!

Chuck is right on the money.

My opinion we are making POI way too difficult.

Think about it another way AP in an POI situation will be the exception. IT's going to be when a missed shot is in the air and we have a double foul. (including rebounds) Or we have a double foul on a throw-in (since by definition neither team has control) We could have the discussion about how te throw-in team shold have team control but I think we have beat that one to a pulp.

I agree...I'll admit I have been. This ol' dog as been hard to teach a new trick to. :)

...and this helps clear it up tremendously.
I was stuck on "team control" at the exact time of the double tech call. The examples by Kelvin and Chuck helped make more sense...and correctly stated about who would have had control if the double T had not occured.

I had a scenario in my head of a double T after a Time Out. No team control(just like a throw-in)...but, now using my newfound clarification, it would be POI to the team that would have had the ball after the TO.

Probably, the confusing part to me was the fact that I got the Throw-in, double fouls, AP procedure down (since no team control), before I read and understood the full concept of POI.

I also like Kelvin's "exception rather than the rule" statement...that helps.

Thanks again.

I disagree. The question, as worded, is the same as "If a double T results in an AP throw-in, such throw-in will be from the location of the ball."

It's NOT the same as, "All double Ts result in an AP throw-in from the location of the ball."

I disagree. The way you word it is probably what the writer intended, but it's not what s/he wrote. All s/he wrote is:

1) A double technical foul is called.
2) The official utilizes the AP arrow.
3) The ball is spotted at the spot closest to where the ball was at the time of the whistle.

That is ambiguous, at best, between your interpretation and mine. We can't know if 2 is correct unless we know more about the play. JMO.

However, since a T or F is required, it was probably intended to carry the interpretation that you provide.

I've been called a lot of things...but a s/he? :)

Chuck, if you can't know if 2 is correct in my question...how do you know if 2 (alternating-possession) is correct in question #79 on the 2005-06 NFHS Part 1 Rules Exam? (I purposely wrote it similar to question #79.)

#79. After a double technical foul, the alternating-possession throw-in shall be from the division line opposite the scorer's and timer's table.




[Edited by RookieDude on Oct 30th, 2005 at 07:40 PM]

You can't. :shrug:

But since the question requires a T or F answer, you probably have to assume that going to the arrow is correct. Then the question becomes, "If an AP throw-in results from a double technical foul, the throw-in is always from a designated spot at midcourt opposite the table."