Can someone get me the rule
 

Can someone be so kind as to give me the rule, including verbage, that deals with what we do after a double technical is called?
Thank you - I want to send it to someone word for word.

It's in rule 4, definitions, under Point of Interruption. Sorry, I don't have the books here.

SECTION 36 POINT OF INTERRUPTION

ART. 1 . . . Method of resuming play due to an official's accidental whistle, an interrupted game, as in 5-4-3, a correctable error, as in 2-10-6, a double personal, double technical or simultaneous foul, as in 4-19-8 and 4-19-10.

ART. 2…Play shall be resumed by:

a. A throw-in to the team that was in control at a spot nearest to where the ball was located when the stoppage occurred.

b. A free throw or a throw-in when the stoppage occurred during this activity or if a team is entitled to such.

c. An alternating-possession throw-in when the point of interruption is such that neither team is in control and no goal, infraction, nor end of quarter/extra period is involved.

Thanks, but I'm looking for the words too so I can cut and paste into an email.

Thank you!

One more thing. Before I send this email, can someone tell me what page 29, case # 4.19.8.E in the Case Book says?

Let me guess.

It's either about where the ball comes in, at the spot of the fouls or where the ball was, or POI v AP.

I knew you were, but thought I'd post that just in case someone had a book but didn't know know where to find it. :)

Player gets fouled (shooting foul). Two opposing players get all close and personal with each other after the foul and a double technical is called.

What do you have?

A1 has the ball in the front court...A5 and B5 are being stupid and get a double foul while: A) A1 is dribbling B) during a pass from A1 to A2 C) during an unsuccessful try.

Ruling A) and B) team control POI at the spot nearest to where the ball was C) no team control or team awarded control after made goal so POI is AP throw-in at spot where ball was at time of double foul.

Made basket: 1 shot lane spaces occupied.

Missed basket: 2 or 3 shots lane spaces occupied.

Is this that case play word for word? If so, it really says they are being stupid?

No I was paraphrasing since I only have last years rules and case book on my computer, it was a lot longer.

4.19.8 Situation A: A1 and B1 foul one another at approximately the same time. The contact occurs during: (a) a live-ball situation; or (b) a dead-ball situation.
Ruling: In (a), it is a double personal foul and in (b), it is a double technical foul. No free throws are awarded in (a) or (b) and play resumes at the point of interruption. (4-36)


4.19.8 Situation B: A1 and B1 are engaged in extremely rough play in the low post area and the covering official calls a double personal foul. After the whistle, A1 and B1 use profanity directed at each other and the covering official calls a double technical foul.
Ruling: The double personal foul during the live ball results in no free throws. The dead-ball profanity results in a double technical foul, again with no free throws. A1 and B1 have each accumulated two fouls toward their five for disqualification. Play is resumed at the point of interruption. (4-36)


4.19.8 Situation C: A1 drives for a try and jumps and releases the ball. Contact occurs between A1 and B1 after the release and before airborne shooter A1 returns to the floor. One official calls a blocking foul on B1 and the other official calls a charging foul on A1. The try is successful.
Ruling: Even though airborne shooter A1 committed a charging foul, it is not a player-control foul because the two fouls result in a double personal foul. The double foul does not cause the ball to become dead on the try and the goal is scored. Play is resumed at the point of interruption, which is a throw-in for Team B from anywhere along the end line. (4-36)


4.19.8 Situation D: A1 has possession of the ball and is about to attempt the first of a one-and-one free-throw situation when A4 and B4 are whistled for a double foul.
Ruling: A4 and B4 are charged with personal fouls and play shall resume from the point of interruption. A1 receives the ball to attempt the one-and-one free throw with the lane spaces properly occupied. (4-36-2b; 7-5-9)


4.19.8 Situation E: A1 has control of the ball in Team A's frontcourt. Post players A5 and B5 are pushing each other in an attempt to gain a more advantageous position on the block while (a) A1 is dribbling the ball; (b) the ball is in the air on a pass from A1 to A2; or (c) the ball is in the air on an unsuccessful try for goal by A1. An official calls a double personal foul on A5 and B5.
Ruling: In (a) and (b), Team A had control of the ball when the double foul occurred, and thus play will be resumed at the point of interruption. Team A will have a designated spot throw-in nearest the location where the ball was located when the double foul occurred. In (c), no team has control while a try for goal is in flight, and since the try was unsuccessful, there is no obvious point of interruption. Play will be resumed with an alternating possession throw-in nearest the location where the ball was located when the double foul occurred. Had the try been successful, the point of interruption would have been a throw-in for Team B from anywhere along the end line. (4-36; 6-4-3g; 7-5-9)

Thank you. The coach kept saying the lane should be cleared and we should then go to the arrow. We shot the two free throws with the lane occupied and continued from there. I will not say exactly, but I was proactive and sent an email about this situation, and a few others, this morning. I was kind of told that the lane spaces should have been occupied and I was directed toward situation E instead of D.
I didn't hesitate when this happened because this would result in the same thing if it was a NCAA game and there was a single (we would shoot shots and then go to POI) or double technical foul.
Later on in the game, the same coach held up the game saying that his team should be shooting the bonus after my partner called an illegal screen on the other team. This was also in my game report. Moral of the story: this coach did not know the rules.
In Maryland (IAABO board 134) the former interpreter used to give coaches a test before the season. It helped them learn some of the rules and also humbled them a little by letting them know they don't know as much as they think they know. Of course, all was forgotten by the time the games started and they were right back to acting like donkeys on the sideline. :D