College Ruling Please

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by TRef21

I agree with your ruling, but I think you have some stuff mixed up. You first shoot the T's for the head coach, which you got correct. If you deem that foul that occurred was intentional technical or flagrant technical, you shoot two free throws and the ball is inbounded on either side of the division line to the offended team. If flagrant, the player is ejected. If we are in the bonus we would resume' play off the ft's in one and one or double bonus. if not in the bonus we would have team A take the ball out of bounds for a designated throw in.

I must be missing something. You were only asking about a direct technical foul. I am not sure if you are aware, but that is the actual classification of a technical foul in NCAA Rules. That means that you can only go to the POI on that type of situation. A direct technical does not involve an ejection (all by itself). And if you wanted to know what happens with a flagrant or intentional foul, why did you not just ask that in your scenario?

What do you do if the lights went off the moment the ball was in the air and you did not see who threw a punch and who came off the bench. Do you then still have the ability to look at the monitor?

Peace

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I must be missing something. You were only asking about a direct technical foul.

If this was a technical foul, then it was an Intentional Technical foul (in NCAAM). Then, the throw-in is at the division line, not the spot nearest the foul.

OTOH, your ruling would have been correct for NCAAW. I'm sure that makes you happy.

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

If this was a technical foul, then it was an Intentional Technical foul (in NCAAM). Then, the throw-in is at the division line, not the spot nearest the foul.

OTOH, your ruling would have been correct for NCAAW. I'm sure that makes you happy.

NCAA 10.4.1 which covers bench technicals says that "disrespectfuly addressing an official" is in fact a direct tech as JRut says with two free throws and POI...which in this case would be bonus free throws or nearest spot throw in we are not in bonus...NCAA women is also POI according to 10.4.1....

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by kbilla

NCAA 10.4.1 which covers bench technicals says that "disrespectfuly addressing an official" is in fact a direct tech as JRut says with two free throws and POI...which in this case would be bonus free throws or nearest spot throw in we are not in bonus...NCAA women is also POI according to 10.4.1....

One of us (probably me) is confused. I was talking about B3's foul on A2 being an intentional T. The throw in for this is at the division line, not the spot nearest the foul (in NCAAM).

I agree that the T on the coach is a direct T.

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

One of us (probably me) is confused. I was talking about B3's foul on A2 being an intentional T. The throw in for this is at the division line, not the spot nearest the foul (in NCAAM).

I agree that the T on the coach is a direct T.

Ahhh I see what you are saying. Are you saying that since the ball was dead when the ball passed through the net that you have an intentional T on A2? The situation doesn't say, but I assumed that this was a common foul, but I guess it depends on what he means by "as the ball is passing through the net"...if the ball was through, then I hope the contact causing the foul was execessive, otherwise he should have passed on it altogether...since he didn't elaborate, I assumed it was just a common foul that occurred just before the ball passed through (live ball)...

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by kbilla

Ahhh I see what you are saying. Are you saying that since the ball was dead when the ball passed through the net that you have an intentional T on A2? The situation doesn't say, but I assumed that this was a common foul, but I guess it depends on what he means by "as the ball is passing through the net"...if the ball was through, then I hope the contact causing the foul was execessive, otherwise he should have passed on it altogether...since he didn't elaborate, I assumed it was just a common foul that occurred just before the ball passed through (live ball)...

I only thought of this as a common foul based on the description. And he did not say the ball was dead. If the ball was dead, that still does not change my answer. That being said the direct T is still a POI application and if you decide to call another T for that foul by B3 is accused of committing, then you still would shoot the Direct T FTs first and then do whatever you had to do to put the ball back in play. If you call a T that requires the ball to be put back in play at the division line, that does not trump that a Direct T in Men's basketball is still a POI foul (live or dead ball).

Peace

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I only thought of this as a common foul based on the description. And he did not say the ball was dead. If the ball was dead, that still does not change my answer. That being said the direct T is still a POI application and if you decide to call another T for that foul by B3 is accused of committing, then you still would shoot the Direct T FTs first and then do whatever you had to do to put the ball back in play. If you call a T that requires the ball to be put back in play at the division line, that does not trump that a Direct T in Men's basketball is still a POI foul (live or dead ball).

Peace

Agree with you, at the risk of misinterpreting what Bob was thinking (Bob correct me if i am wrong), i think he was thinking that the foul by A2 was dead ball...which assuming it was excessive (non-flagrant) contact it would be an intentional T, not direct...then with the direct on the coach, you have a false multiple which you would administer in the order of occurence...shoot the intentional T first, then shoot the direct on the coach, then go POI which in this case would be B's ball at division line for the initial intentional T by A2...but again I thought the foul by A2 was common and none of this matters...did I get that right?