Simultaneous Fouls question

[ChuckElias]

This situation was mentioned to me last night before a game and I think I know the answer, but I want to run it by the forum. Very simple situation, I want to know the proper administration.

Simultaneous fouls: A1 fouls B1, B2 fouls A2. B2's foul is intentional.

Clearly simultaneous, clearly intentional. How do we administer?

[Jurassic Referee]

No FT's-go to POI.

[ChuckElias]

That's what I thought, JR, and that's what the guys on the game did. But it just seems wrong NOT to shoot FTs for an intentional foul. I kept looking through the case plays and couldn't find anything. I just kept coming back to the definition of "simultaneous foul", which says that it's two fouls committed by opponents, but not against each other.

[bob jenkins]

Agreed. Though it seems "unfair" to A, it's no different than double personal fouls when A is in the bonus and B isn't -- A "loses" out on the FTs.

[FrankHtown]

What would we do in the case of A1 fouls B1, and simultaneously B2 curses A2?...An intentional foul, like a technical foul, carries its own penalty...

Would we just go to POI??????

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by FrankHtown
What would we do in the case of A1 fouls B1, and simultaneously B2 curses A2?...An intentional foul, like a technical foul, carries its own penalty...

Would we just go to POI??????

Okay, work with me on this and see if you agree with the logic:

A personal foul by A1 against B1 and a technical foul by by B1 against A1 would not be considered a double foul, as the rule book refers a double technical or a double personal. The rule book does not define a personal foul and a technical foul, committed by opponents against each other as a double foul.

The way I read it, the only difference in double fouls and simultaneous fouls is that simultaneous fouls are not committed against by two opponents against each other.

Therefore, I would treat it as a false double foul and rule that you would shoot FTs as what you describe would not meet the definition of simultaneous fouls. Since the fouls will probably be called by different officials, you should have room to rule that one came after the other. You could possibly do this in the original situation as well.

[cmathews]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

Okay, work with me on this and see if you agree with the logic:

A personal foul by A1 against B1 and a technical foul by by B1 against A1 would not be considered a double foul, as the rule book refers a double technical or a double personal. The rule book does not define a personal foul and a technical foul, committed by opponents against each other as a double foul.

The way I read it, the only difference in double fouls and simultaneous fouls is that simultaneous fouls are not committed against by two opponents against each other.

Therefore, I would treat it as a false double foul and rule that you would shoot FTs as what you describe would not meet the definition of simultaneous fouls. Since the fouls will probably be called by different officials, you should have room to rule that one came after the other. You could possibly do this in the original situation as well.

BBR I would agree except for one item. The simultaneous foul definition says "A simultaneous foul (personal or technical)....."

With that in mind I think that the originl situation would be a simultaneous foul since that definition doesn't break them out individually like the double fould definition does...however I am thinking that you could correctly "assume" that one occured before the other and now make it a false double....or better yet "make" one occur before the other.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by cmathews

BBR I would agree except for one item. The simultaneous foul definition says "A simultaneous foul (personal or technical)....."

With that in mind I think that the originl situation would be a simultaneous foul since that definition doesn't break them out individually like the double fould definition does...however I am thinking that you could correctly "assume" that one occured before the other and now make it a false double....or better yet "make" one occur before the other.

That does not mean a combination of personal and technical but two of either.

A1 fouls B1 and B2 fouls A2 or A1 gets a T for calling one official a doody head at the same time B2 gets a T for saying it to another official.

[cmathews]

Originally posted by blindzebra

That does not mean a combination of personal and technical but two of either.

A1 fouls B1 and B2 fouls A2 or A1 gets a T for calling one official a doody head at the same time B2 gets a T for saying it to another official.

I humbly disagree and this is why. We already have definitions of double fouls and double technicals. I believe that the parenthesis indicate that either/or or a combination of the two. If it weren't meant to be this way then there would be no need for a simultaneous fould definition, because the situation would fit nicely into the definition of a double foul or a false double foul. IMHO

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by cmathews

I humbly disagree and this is why. We already have definitions of double fouls and double technicals. I believe that the parenthesis indicate that either/or or a combination of the two. If it weren't meant to be this way then there would be no need for a simultaneous fould definition, because the situation would fit nicely into the definition of a double foul or a false double foul. IMHO

DF or DTF are committed by players on both teams against each other. SF fouls are fouls committed by both teams at the same time, but not player against player, and that is the difference between the two.

The rule is clearly intended as simultaneous personal or technicals and not one personal and one technical.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by cmathews
If it weren't meant to be this way then there would be no need for a simultaneous fould definition, because the situation would fit nicely into the definition of a double foul or a false double foul. IMHO

I disagree. The definition of a simultaneous folu is needed because the fouls are not against one another. I agree with BZ that the two fouls must be the same, just as they have to be the same for a double foul. As I stated, I believe simulataneous fouls are identical in definition to double fouls, except that the fouls are not committed against each other. That's clearly spelled out in the rule.

[cmathews]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

I disagree. The definition of a simultaneous folu is needed because the fouls are not against one another. I agree with BZ that the two fouls must be the same, just as they have to be the same for a double foul. As I stated, I believe simulataneous fouls are identical in definition to double fouls, except that the fouls are not committed against each other. That's clearly spelled out in the rule.

Ok I see the light now LOL...I do believe we could do away with the simultaneous foul and just add some language such as "personal fouls committed by each team at approxiamately the same time" or "technical fouls committed by each team at approxiamately the same time" but that might be toooooo easy....

[Raymond]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by BktBallRef

Therefore, I would treat it as a false double foul and rule that you would shoot FTs as what you describe would not meet the definition of simultaneous fouls. Since the fouls will probably be called by different officials, you should have room to rule that one came after the other. You could possibly do this in the original situation as well.

You lost me on this one. Thought second half of a false double foul occurs after the ball is dead and before the clock starts:

Rule 4 Section 26 Art. 12. False double foul. A false double foul occurs when there are fouls
by both teams, the second of which occurs before the game clock is started
after it is stopped for the first but such that at least one of the attributes of
a double foul is absent.

[cmathews]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by BadNewsRef

Originally posted by BktBallRef

You lost me on this one. Thought second half of a false double foul occurs after the ball is dead and before the clock starts:

Rule 4 Section 26 Art. 12. False double foul. A false double foul occurs when there are fouls
by both teams, the second of which occurs before the game clock is started
after it is stopped for the first but such that at least one of the attributes of
a double foul is absent.

Badnews, there is no such rule article and section. The fouls are listed under rule 4 article 19......hmmmmmmm

[Raymond]

Originally posted by cmathews

Badnews, there is no such rule article and section. The fouls are listed under rule 4 article 19......hmmmmmmm

Sorry, should have mentioned that this was referenced from 2006 NCAA rulebook. My NFHS book is out in the car.