NCAA question

[JS 20]

I was watching Kentucky-Louisville and this happens

K1 commits intentional foul on L1 who was trying to dunk it. Both teams run up in a big group and then L2 pushes someone who gets in his face. When all is said and done, intentional foul on K1 and a Technical foul on L2 for the pushing.

So Kentucky shot the 2 free throws for the tech w/ an empty lane, then the guy who got intentionally fouled from Louisville shot his two shots w/ a full lane and play resumed.

Is this right? I know the NCAA doesn't always do things "in order" but it seems like this kind of penalizes UL even though they got intentionally fouled?

[sixer]

Didn't see it, but it doesn't sound right. I think this describes a false double foul. Which would mean that the tech is penalized and then play is resumed from the POI, which would be the enforcement of the intentional personal: two shots and a throw in to offended team.

[Back In The Saddle]

Not sure why they shot the intentional with the lane loaded and played on. Should be shot with the lane cleared and L's ball for a throw-in a the spot nearest the foul.

[JS 20]

Yeah it was really weird. It didn't look right to me at all. There's no point in calling it an intentional foul based on the way they did it.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by JS 20

I was watching Kentucky-Louisville and this happens

K1 commits intentional foul on L1 who was trying to dunk it. Both teams run up in a big group and then L2 pushes someone who gets in his face. When all is said and done, intentional foul on K1 and a Technical foul on L2 for the pushing.

So Kentucky shot the 2 free throws for the tech w/ an empty lane, then the guy who got intentionally fouled from Louisville shot his two shots w/ a full lane and play resumed.

Is this right? I know the NCAA doesn't always do things "in order" but it seems like this kind of penalizes UL even though they got intentionally fouled?

Are you certain an intentional foul was called? It sounds like it was handled as if the foul on the shooter was not intentional...

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by sixer

That's not how I read the original post.

Yeah, you're right - I misread the original post and just deleted my post.

With that said, false double fouls are still enforced. In the NCAA most technicals are enforced by shooting two and then resuming at the POI, which would be the free throws for the original foul.

It appears that one of two things happened - the officials didn't administer the intentional foul correctly, or the OP/announcers/someone made a mistake and the original foul wasn't an intentional.

[sixer]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

In the NCAA most technicals are enforced by shooting two and then resuming at the POI, which would be the free throws for the original foul.

Which leads me to believe that either a) the refs handled incorrectly (doubtful) or b) the original foul was not intentional. However, I'm sure JS 20 is sharp enough to notice whether the signal for an intentional foul was given or not.

Dunno, sounds incorrect.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by sixer

Which leads me to believe that either a) the refs handled incorrectly (doubtful) or b) the original foul was not intentional. However, I'm sure JS 20 is sharp enough to notice whether the signal for an intentional foul was given or not.

Dunno, sounds incorrect.

Agree completely.

[rockyroad]

Looking at the internet play-by-play on the Louisville website, they have the intitial foul at 8:13 as a Personal, not Intentional, followed by the T on the UL player...so it sounds like the refs handled it correctly.

[Texas Aggie]

It was a double whistle situation where the lead called the foul and the C came in with the intentional signal. I can only guess that when they talked, the C agreed to drop the intentional call. I think that was a mistake. It wasn't the hardest foul you'll ever see, but an intentional would have been a good call in that sit.

[JS 20]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

It was a double whistle situation where the lead called the foul and the C came in with the intentional signal. I can only guess that when they talked, the C agreed to drop the intentional call. I think that was a mistake. It wasn't the hardest foul you'll ever see, but an intentional would have been a good call in that sit.

Exactly, C came in w/ the intentional while L was in between the players. I agree it should have been an intentional. Correct me if i'm wrong, but from what I remember, not only did the defender grab the shooter's arm and pull him to the ground, but he grabbed it at or above the elbow. I think he had him around the bicep area, can't really say he was going for the ball. Based on the situation he was just trying to stop the dunk. In retrospect, given what happened afterwards, kind of wonder why they didn't leave it as an intentional to help get control of the game.

[jeffpea]

didn't see the play, only the previous postings.....based on the descriptions, the crew did NOT handle the T correctly. They had a dead ball T (happened after the original foul was called) that included contact (the pushing/shoving) which they deemed not to be Flagrant ( not combative action/punch/etc) - this is one of two situations where the T is penalized by 2 FT's and the ball (administered at half-court opposite the table). In essence, the crew had an intentional technical foul and did not penalize correctly.

There are only two possible explanations for handling the T penaly as they did: 1) the got it wrong, or 2) the T was not called for a shove/push, but rather just for something a player said verbally......

I had this exact situation happen to me earlier in the year and did not administer the penalty correctly. As a result, I'll "never make that mistake again"......

[Scrapper1]

Jeff is correct -- IF the technical foul was for dead ball contact. That would make it an intentional technical foul by Men's rules; which means the penalty is 2 shots and the ball. They should have shot the free throws for the personal foul first with the lane cleared. Then shot the free throws for the T with the lane cleared, then awarded Kentucky the ball at midcourt.

It's also possible that the T was for something that was said -- making it an unsporting technical. In which case, the penalty is 2 free throws and resume at the POI.

[SoInZebra]

Do not be surprised if the new NCAA men's coordinator cleans up technical foul rules/administration in the next year or two.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by SoInZebra

Do not be surprised if the new NCAA men's coordinator cleans up technical foul rules/administration in the next year or two.

How? He's not going to be on the rules committee, is he?