IAABO Refresher Test Question #58.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Chuck:

You are correct about NFHS R10-S3-A10, but the definition of a personal foul takes precedence in defining what is and is not a personal foul. Another point that should be remembered that may not be apparent is that you can have only one person charged with fighting. A player's actions can be to instigate a fight and if the victim does not retaliate then only one person is charged with fighting.

It should be noted that because the NFHS does not have specific game suspension penalties for fighting like the NCAA, the definition for fighting really has no impact on the players who are charged with fighting but do have an impact on substitutes and other bench personal with regard to penalties during the game.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Chuck:

You are correct about NFHS R10-S3-A10, but the definition of a personal foul takes precedence in defining what is and is not a personal foul.

Not that it's really critical (b/c whether it's a flagrant personal or flagrant technical, the player is ejected), but why would you say that the "personal" definition "takes precedence"? I'm pretty sure that the Rule 10 reference is explicit. A player is charged with a flagrant technical foul when -- he is charged with fighting. This seems pretty clear. Why would a much more complicated explanation have precedence?

Another point that should be remembered that may not be apparent is that you can have only one person charged with fighting. A player's actions can be to instigate a fight and if the victim does not retaliate then only one person is charged with fighting.

I agree completely, but this isn't the case in the example you cited. You talked about two players exchanging punches. So while I agree with your point above, I'm not sure why you made it. What were you trying to get at?

Chuck

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
Mark, interesting references. I can see why you'd say these were personal. But I looked up fighting in the NF rulebook, and I'm almost sure it was listed under player technicals in Rule 10. I'm going to have to go back and double check. Good references tho.

Chuck

It is listed there -- that's just to cover the swing-and-miss scenario. Live ball, swing-and-hit is a personal foul. Dead ball, swing-and-hit is a T (it could have been covered under 10-3-9).

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Not that it's really critical (b/c whether it's a flagrant personal or flagrant technical, the player is ejected), but why would you say that the "personal" definition "takes precedence"? I'm pretty sure that the Rule 10 reference is explicit. A player is charged with a flagrant technical foul when -- he is charged with fighting. This seems pretty clear. Why would a much more complicated explanation have precedence?

I agree completely, but this isn't the case in the example you cited. You talked about two players exchanging punches. So while I agree with your point above, I'm not sure why you made it. What were you trying to get at?

Chuck

In this case the personal foul definition takes precedence over the R10-S3-A10, because there are only two types of fouls: personal and technical.

Personal fouls are contact fouls when the ball is live (I have not forgotten the airborne shooter provision, I just want to keep it simple. All other fouls are technical fouls.

[Joel Poli]

If it is a FDF, Why do we use the AP?

[Dave King]

Originally posted by Camron Rust

Whether it is a false double foul or just simultaneous personal fouls is ultimately of no consequence. In either case, you shoot the FTs as needed (1+1 or 2). Ball OOB with to the team with the arrow. [/B]

I'll preface this by saying "this ain't gonna ever happen"...

Anyway, what if this happens when A is in the bonus and
B is not; and the Arrow favors "A"?
Does "A" get 1+1 plus the ball? "B" gets NOTHING???.

I've read all of Mark D's rules citations, and while I respect his (and others) opinion of the play, I still say its not a FDF. Obviously, they do not have a Rule 4 definition for "Simultaneous personal Fouls", which is what this is.

Q#58 says the fouls happened simultaneously. An FDF is when a second foul occurs before the clock starts FOLLOWING (read AFTER -- or AT A DIFFERENT TIME than) the first.

In an FDF, each foul carries its own penalty. Which of the 2 seperate fouls in Q #58 includes a throw-in as part of its penalty?.... And again, if "A" is in the bonus and has the arrow, and B is not, what does "B" get out of it? They're not even getting their throw-in (for A's foul).

I'll quit posting on this now...
Somebody make an addendum to 4.19 !!!!

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

It took some time but I have foundation for simultaneous personal fouls being double fouls.

The NFHS and NCAA Men’s Rules Committee, for the 1980-81 season, added two center jump situations (the center jump has now been superceded by the alternating possession arrow). These two situations are simultaneous personal fouls and simultaneous technical fouls, and can be found in the 2001-02 rules books at:

NFHS: R6-S3-A3g

NCAA Men’s and Women’s: R6-S3-A1f.

Quoting from the NFHS 1980-81 Comments on the above rule change:

Addition of Two Center Jump Situations (R6-S2-A3, R6-S2-A4). The false double foul rule was revised over a three-year period. The rule is now clearly written and easy to understand and administer. The present coverage can result in two instances where a center jump is required following administration of free throws. If the fouls involved in the last penalty of a false double foul are simultaneous personal or simultaneous technical fouls by opponents (but not on each other) a center jump must follow the free throw administration. It would not be fair to allow play to continue as normal following a made or missed free throw at either end of the court. It would also have been true that with simultaneous personal fouls and neither team in the bonus, if there were no jump ball, one team would be awarded the ball out-of-bounds. The two additions clarify that a center jump is required in these two instances, so neither team is given an advantage.

[Dave King]

Good god man...WHY do you have a 1980-81 rule book???

You would think that this procedure would be included in, oh, I don't know, A CURRENT RULE BOOK....

NF: How about a Rule 4 Def. for a simultaneous personal foul, along with a definitive penalty admin?

What I still don't agree with is the penalty admin with one team in the bonus and the other not. The NF as gone to great lengths with the other simultaneous/double situations to make sure that one team does not overly "profit" from these situations. If A is in bonus, and has the arrow, and B is not in the bonus, this situation could produce a 4 or 5 point swing (or more) for team A.

I don't think they're being consistent on this one...

I tip my hat to Mark on his perseverance...

dk

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

The penalty administration for simultaneous personal fouls is really quite equal.

First: Simultaneous personal fouls are a false double foul (I know, I know, but I am quite stubborn and correct on this one). Remember the word double means fouls by both teams.

Second: Only in a double foul (and not a false) are free throw not shot, no matter what type of fouls are committed are committed by the two opponents (flagrant, intentional). In a false double foul the penalties for each foul must be carried out. The center jump (AP arrow nearest the spot of the foul) is just a way to put the ball into play after the penalty of the last foul.

In all of the following plays the ball is live, Team A has the AP arrow when A1 fouls B1 at the same time B2 fouls A2.

Play 1: Both fouls are common fouls and neither team is in the bonus. Team A gets the AP throw-in.

Play 2: Both fouls are common fouls and Team A is in the bonus and Team B is not. A2 shoots free throws and then Team A gets the AP throw-in.

Play 3: Both fouls are common fouls and Team B is in the bonus and Team A is not. B1 shoots free throws and then Team A gets the AP throw-in.

Play 4: Both fouls are common fouls and and both teams are in the bonus. B1 shoots free throws, then A2 shoots free throws, and then Team A gets the AP throw-in.

Play 5: A1's fouls is intentional or flagarant and B2's is common and neither team is in the bonus. B1 shoots free throws and then Team A gets the AP throw-in.

I think you can see where I am going with these examples. Nothing would change if Team B had the AP arrow except that if both teams were going to shoot free throws you would have B1 shoot free throws last.