Simultaneous foul w/ bucket - what is POI?

[Mendy Trent]

A1 lets a 3-pointer fly. After it is in the air (A1 still an airborne shooter), B1 runs into him and U1 whistles a foul. At exactly the same time, U2 whistles a foul on A2 who knocked B2 to the ground while blocking out way too aggressively. The 3-point try by A1 is successful. U1 and U2 get together and decide that they have a simultaneous foul situation.

What is the POI? Do we shoot the FT with the lane cleared and then award the ball to team B regardless of the FT being made or missed? Or do we shoot the free throw with players on the lane (basically not penalizing the foul on A2 except for the additional team foul to Team A)?

Rule or Case reference please. Is it different for NCAA and NFHS?

[Adam]

Rule reference: 4-36-2-b
"A free throw or a throw-in when the interruption occured during the activity or if a team is entitled to such."

In this case, B gets a throw-in anywhere along the endline.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Mendy Trent

A1 lets a 3-pointer fly. After it is in the air (A1 still an airborne shooter), B1 runs into him and U1 whistles a foul. At exactly the same time, U2 whistles a foul on A2 who knocked B2 to the ground while blocking out way too aggressively. The 3-point try by A1 is successful. U1 and U2 get together and decide that they have a simultaneous foul situation.

What is the POI? Do we shoot the FT with the lane cleared and then award the ball to team B regardless of the FT being made or missed? Or do we shoot the free throw with players on the lane (basically not penalizing the foul on A2 except for the additional team foul to Team A)?

Rule or Case reference please. Is it different for NCAA and NFHS?

According to 10-6 Penalty Summary 1d, there are no free throws awarded for a simultaneous personal foul and the ball is put back in play at the POI. Therefore, A1 is not entitled to a FT despite being fouled in the act of shooting (as an airborne shooter). That opportunity is lost due to the foul by his teammate A2. For the same reason B2 would not be entitled to any FTs even if his team were in the bonus.

In this case, the made goal by A1 entitles Team B to an endline throw-in, so according 4-36-2b that is our POI.
The closest Case Book reference for the POI comes from a play with a double foul, but since 10-6 Penalty Summary 1c tells us that the penalty for that is the same, other than which players are charged with the fouls, this still provides proper guidance.

4.19.8 SITUATION E:

A1 has control of the ball in Team A's frontcourt. Post
players A5 and B5 are pushing each other in an attempt to gain a more advantageous
position on the block while (a) A1 is dribbling the ball; (b) the ball is in the

air on a pass from A1 to A2; or (c) the ball is in the air on an unsuccessful try for
goal by A1. An official calls a double personal foul on A5 and B5. RULING: In (a)
and (b), Team A had control of the ball when the double foul occurred, and thus
play will be resumed at the point of interruption. Team A will have a designated
spot throw-in nearest the location where the ball was located when the double
foul occurred. In (c), no team has control while a try for goal is in flight, and since
the try was unsuccessful, there is no obvious point of interruption. Play will be
resumed with an alternating possession throw-in nearest the location where the
ball was located when the double foul occurred. Had the try been successful, the
point of interruption would have been a throw-in for Team B from anywhere along
the end line. (4-36; 6-4-3g; 7-5-3b)

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

In this case, the made goal by A1 entitles Team B to an endline throw-in, so according 4-36-2b that is our POI.

Agreed. See also 4.19.8C

Interestingly, though, if it was a false double foul, then FTs are shot (see 4.19.9A -- so if A1 and B1 foul each other, the shot counts and B gets a throw-in (or we go to AP if the shot wasn't successful). If B1 fouls A1 and A1 fouls B2, then the shot doesn't count and we shoot FTs and then B gets a throw-in.)

I'm sure that's a distinction that not many coaches (or officials) will understand.

[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.

[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.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

... If B1 fouls A1 and A1 fouls B2, then the shot doesn't count and we shoot FTs and then B gets a throw-in.)

I'm sure that's a distinction that not many coaches (or officials) will understand.

What will be even harder to explain to the coach is why A1 is being charged with a foul.