Rookie Question

[samkidder]

Very JV question here...

I play in a rec league that claims to adhere to high school rules. We had an interesting situation today. A player on Team A was fouled on the shot by a player on Team B. Team B protested and was assessed a technical foul. The ref proceeded to award Team A two free throws with no players lined up around the key, and then gave the fouled player his two free throws...the problem was that he gave the fouled player two free throws with no one in rebounding position and then gave Team A the ball back after the four (total) free throws. It was my understanding that Team A should have received two bonus free throws (with no one in rebounding position), and then the two shots resulting from the foul should have been attempted with both teams in normal rebounding position with play resuming after the shots. Effectively, the refs gave Team A a double bonus for the technical foul: they got two free throws AND an extra possession. I got T'd up for asking to see a rulebook, and then got in a fierce agument with the officiating crew after the game.

Can someone please explain who is right? Were the refs correct in awarding Team A four free throws (two for the tech, two for the foul on the shot) AND the ball back after the free throws? Is this the right call at any level of play?

Thanks and sorry for the long-winded post.

[Nevadaref]

HS rules, known as NFHS, state that the penalty for the technical foul is two FTs PLUS possession of the ball for a throw-in from the division line opposite the table.
So, yes, the officials in your game were correct to award FOUR FTs with the lane clear to your opponents AND then administer a throw-in at midcourt to that same team. However, they made a slight mistake in the administration order. Under NFHS rules the FTs should have been shot in the order in which the fouls occurred. Therefore, the 2 FTs by the player who was fouled in the act of shooting should have been taken first, then anyone from the offended team may attempt the two free throws for the technical foul. This is a minor thing however and there is even a casebook play which says that a mistake in the administration sequence is not a correctable error as long as all of the merited FTs were awarded.

So you were incorrect and the officials were right. Good of you to have the courage to ask and find out. Now you learned something.

However, under NCAA rules, technical FTs for unsporting conduct are administered immediately and then the game resumes at the point of interruption. That is what you were thinking should have been done in your contest.
In a college game, the officials would have administered the two FTs for the T right away with the lane spaces unoccupied, then would have lined everyone up along the lane and shot the 2FTs for the shooting foul as normal. In college, possession of the ball is not part of the penalty for most technical fouls. (There are a few special cases in which the team does get the ball as well.)

[Texas Aggie]

They were correct, and you misinterpreted what they did. They actually shot the foul shots first, then the T shots, and then got the ball at the division line. In HS rules, you enforce the penalties in the order of occurance. Since they were going to receive the ball at the end of the shots for the T, there was no reason to line up the players.

There was no double bonus; all technical fouls result in a penalty of 2 shots plus the ball. The only exception is if there are multiple technical fouls -- just the multiple sets of shots plus the ball. In other words, they don't keep getting the ball out of bounds just because there was more than one T.

I would suggest not getting into "fierce arguments" unless you are sure of your position. I can assure you that you look like an utter idiot in such situations. I had a guy who once told me (during the half of a grade school league game using HS rules) that T's only resulted in ONE free throw, rather than 2. My partner, who was a cop and had brought his "gear" in, reached in his bag and pulled out a book. He turned to the page that it discussed this and said, "dude, if you can read, it states it here." There were many people standing around and the guy walked away without saying anything.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by samkidder

I play in a rec league that claims to adhere to high school rules. We had an interesting situation today. A player on Team A was fouled on the shot by a player on Team B. Team B protested and was assessed a technical foul. The ref proceeded to award Team A two free throws with no players lined up around the key, and then gave the fouled player his two free throws...the problem was that he gave the fouled player two free throws with no one in rebounding position and then gave Team A the ball back after the four (total) free throws. It was my understanding that Team A should have received two bonus free throws (with no one in rebounding position), and then the two shots resulting from the foul should have been attempted with both teams in normal rebounding position with play resuming after the shots. Effectively, the refs gave Team A a double bonus for the technical foul: they got two free throws AND an extra possession. I got T'd up for asking to see a rulebook, and then got in a fierce agument with the officiating crew after the game.

Can someone please explain who is right? Were the refs correct in awarding Team A four free throws (two for the tech, two for the foul on the shot) AND the ball back after the free throws? Is this the right call at any level of play?

Thanks and sorry for the long-winded post.

As has been stated; at worst, they gave the free throws in the wrong order. A very minor thing.
And I'd have T'd you up for asking to see a rule book. You owe this crew an apology, big time. Even if they'd gotten the rule wrong, asking for the rulebook during a game is a pretty easy T. And, getting into an argument afterwards is off limits in all the rec leagues I've worked.

[truerookie]

Snaqwells, I agree asking to see a rule book is an easy T. If a coach wants to see a rule book he/she can get their own.