Foul...then intentional

[tjones1]

Team A is in the bonus. A1 is fouled by B2. After the call, an intentional foul is called on B2.

Since it was a dead ball, would it be an intentional technical foul? Therefore, the player fouled during the live action would shoot the bonus. Then, two shots and the ball opposite table for throw-in.

In recap:
Add two team fouls to the offending team's total count.
A minimum of 3 free throws, maximum of 4.
Minimum of 1 free throw shooter, maximum of 3 (2 is also possible).
Ball opposite table for throw-in.

Is this correct?

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by tjones1
Team A is in the bonus. A1 is fouled by B2. After the call, an intentional foul is called on B2.

Since it was a dead ball, would it be an intentional technical foul? Therefore, the player fouled during the live action would shoot the bonus. Then, two shots and the ball opposite table for throw-in.

In recap:
Add two team fouls to the offending team's total count.
A minimum of 3 free throws, maximum of 4.
Minimum of 1 free throw shooter, maximum of 3 (2 is also possible).
Ball opposite table for throw-in.

Is this correct?

Yes to all the above.

[Lotto]

In NCAAM, it would work almost the same, except the same shooter must attempt both FTs for the intentional T.

In NCAAW, there is no such thing as an intentional T. The dead ball contact would be a direct T on the player. Shoot the two FTs for the T immediately (same shooter must attempt both) and then resume at point of interruption, namely the 1-1 FTs (with players occupying lane spaces and play continuing as normal after any 1-1).

Interesting side question: In NCAAW, since a sub can shoot the FTs for the T, it seems as though A6 can replace A1 to shoot the FTs for the T. But then it's illegal for A1 to come back into the game to shoot her FTs! I guess that means that if coach wants A6 to shoot the FTs for the T, she would have to come in for one of the other players. Never thought of that before.