Simultaneous foul w/ bucket - what is POI?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by SmokeEater

So, the fact that there is the double foul negates the infraction by B1 on the shooter? I would have thought that A1 would get 1 shot and then B gets teh end line throw in. Very interesting.

What happens if there were no fouls? That's what (almost always) happens if there is a double foul or a simultaneous foul.

[SmokeEater]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

What happens if there were no fouls? That's what (almost always) happens if there is a double foul or a simultaneous foul.

Ok, Right I miss read the OP. For some reason I was thinking there was a double foul called on the players boxing each other out. There by it would have left us with 3 infractions to report. Then I believe we are left with the free throw and B gets a throw in on end line.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by SmokeEater

Ok, Right I miss read the OP. For some reason I was thinking there was a double foul called on the players boxing each other out. There by it would have left us with 3 infractions to report. Then I believe we are left with the free throw and B gets a throw in on end line.

I disagree. A1 is the jumpshooter. B1 fouls him in after the release, but before he returns to the floor. At approximately the same time A4 and B4, who are battling for rebounding position near the basket, are whistled for a double foul. The try is successful.

I believe that the double foul and the personal foul by B1 still get classified as simultaneous fouls and thus no FTs would be awarded. Resume at the POI -- endline throw-in for Team B.

But it would be nice to have a case play from the NFHS on this.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I disagree. A1 is the jumpshooter. B1 fouls him in after the release, but before he returns to the floor. At approximately the same time A4 and B4, who are battling for rebounding position near the basket, are whistled for a double foul. The try is successful.

I believe that the double foul and the personal foul by B1 still get classified as simultaneous fouls and thus no FTs would be awarded. Resume at the POI -- endline throw-in for Team B.

But it would be nice to have a case play from the NFHS on this.

A simultaneous foul.....is a situation in which there is a foul by both teams which occurs at approximately the same time, but are not committed by opponents against each other.

The above situation would not meet this definition. What we have here is a double foul and another foul, which, I would think must be dealt with separately, as suggested by SmokeEater.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

A simultaneous foul.....is a situation in which there is a foul by both teams which occurs at approximately the same time, but are not committed by opponents against each other.

The above situation would not meet this definition. What we have here is a double foul and another foul, which, I would think must be dealt with separately, as suggested by SmokeEater.

Ok, assume that is true. Now how do you deal with them separately? Specifically, in which order would you suggest administering the penalties? Recall that 8-7 says to administer the fouls in the order in which they occurred. Here they occurred at the same time.

I admit that the situation isn't crystal clear, which is why I said that an NFHS play ruling would be nice.

There seem to be three ways of viewing this situation.

1. As I wrote above, the fouls by A4 and B4 combine to make ONE foul -- a double foul. Then that foul would combine with the other foul by B1 to make up the simultaneous foul. No one gets any FTs and the games resumes from the POI. However, as you point out one of the fouls in this case (the double foul) is not a foul by a team, but by both teams.

2. Take all three fouls that occurred at approximately the same time and offset them as best you can. However, the only reasonable offsetting is A4 and B4 which is clearly a double foul, not a simultaneous foul. One could pair B1's foul with A4's that meets the definition of a simultaneous foul, and would leave B4's to be administered, but that seems whacky.

3. Understand the three fouls to be a double foul and a personal foul, which occur at the same time. Now figure out how to administer this.
This is problematic too.
A. Should we apply the penalty for the double foul first, which gives no FTs and sends us to the POI, and that would then be the foul by B1. So charge A4 and B4 with personal fouls and then pretend that they didn't happen and proceed as normal with the foul by B1.
B. Or should we first apply the penalty for the personal foul by B1, award the single FT with the lane clear, and then apply the penalty for the double foul and go to the POI. In that case what is the POI? Is it the endline throw-in from the made goal? Or would it be the throw-in from the made FT? What if the FT is unsuccessful? Do we use the AP arrow?

After giving this situation some thought, I'm leaning toward method 3A because it seems to be the smoothest and most equitable, but I still see no justification for applying the penalty for the double foul prior to the penalty for the personal foul.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Should we apply the penalty for the double foul first, which gives no FTs and sends us to the POI, and that would then be the foul by B1. So charge A4 and B4 with personal fouls and then pretend that they didn't happen and proceed as normal with the foul by B1.

This is the only reasonable solution.

What happens if there were no fouls? That's what (almost always) happens if there is a double foul or a simultaneous foul.

A wise man once said, "Always listen to Bob."

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I disagree. A1 is the jumpshooter. B1 fouls him in after the release, but before he returns to the floor. At approximately the same time A4 and B4, who are battling for rebounding position near the basket, are whistled for a double foul. The try is successful.

I believe that the double foul and the personal foul by B1 still get classified as simultaneous fouls and thus no FTs would be awarded. Resume at the POI -- endline throw-in for Team B.

But it would be nice to have a case play from the NFHS on this.

An NFHS case play on a situation where three fouls are called at once? I doubt we'll ever see it (the situation or the case play). If this play happens, the non-calling official gets free beer from his partners all season long.

Speaking of the non-calling official, that reminds me. How do you rotate this when you have two officials calling simultaneous (or even double) fouls?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

An NFHS case play on a situation where three fouls are called at once? I doubt we'll ever see it (the situation or the case play). If this play happens, the non-calling official gets free beer from his partners all season long.

I guess I owe some beers.

Most bizarre one that I've ever had

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Speaking of the non-calling official, that reminds me. How do you rotate this when you have two officials calling simultaneous (or even double) fouls?

You now have two Trails.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I guess I owe some beers.

Most bizarre one that I've ever had



You now have two Trails.

Or two Cs, if you're IAABO.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Or two Cs, if your IAABO.