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.

[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.

[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...