Fight situation

[Camron Rust]

The lane was cleared and white got the ball at the division line becasue the fouls happened at the end a quarter (hence the huddle at the bench after the FT) ....and white had the AP arrow.

[Nevadaref]

Red 33 and White 30 were both charged with flagrant technical fouls. This was a double technical foul and no FTs were awarded. Both players were disqualified.

Since Red 33 had been fouled by White 30 during the live ball which immeditately preceeded the melee, AND IT SEEMS THAT RED WAS IN THE BONUS (that's the bit of missing info), Red 33's substitute will come in and attempt the 1-and-1. [JAR wrote that Red had team control so there is no try involved. The foul is a common foul.] That substitute was Red 11. She missed the front end of the 1-and-1.

Now the officials should have had players lined-up along the lane for this FT as play should have resumed from the POI following the double T, but instead they kicked the administration of this part and awarded White the ball at the division line by using the AP arrow.

That's my conjecture.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Since Red 33 had been fouled by White 30 during the live ball which immeditately preceeded the melee, AND IT SEEMS THAT RED WAS IN THE BONUS (that's the bit of missing info), Red 33's substitute will come in and attempt the 1-and-1. [JAR wrote that Red had team control so there is no try involved. The foul is a common foul.] That substitute was Red 11. She missed the front end of the 1-and-1.
That's my conjecture.

Not so fast...team control still exists while a player is in the act of shooting but before the ball is released....so a try could be involved.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Not so fast...team control still exists while a player is in the act of shooting but before the ball is released....so a try could be involved.

I wondered how he jumped to that conclusion.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The lane was cleared and white got the ball at the division line becasue the fouls happened at the end a quarter (hence the huddle at the bench after the FT) ....and white had the AP arrow.

I like this thought!

If all of this activity happened very near the expiration of time in a quarter, then it is possible that the officials administered it correctly since the POI would be the AP throw-in for the beginning of the new quarter.

Very clever, Camron.

[Kelvin green]

I dont buy POI...

1) If it was the end of a quarter... then the initial foul had to happen before time expired in the quarter. Quarter is not over until Red finishes the 1 and 1 (assuming team is in bonus) Then you have the double technical for the fighting where both players are ejected. Since the T's and the mayhem occurred before the end of the quarter it is still all part of the quarter and no penalties can carry over to another quarter...

2) Coaches from both teams on the floor were beckoned on in a fight in my book. (whether signalled or not)

3) The original post said several white players ran on to the floor if no red players ran on to the floor, there is no offsetting technical foul (original post said not sure that red players ran out) So If there were more than the 5 white players out there, the offenders would have been disqualified...

If the bench cleared, white is playing with 4 players because white has no subs and one on the floor disqualified....

If red had players come on to the floor they too would have been disqualified and then there would have been the offsetting T's

4) because white players came on to the floor the White Head Coach now has an indirect. Same with Red if they had players come on to the floor...


5) if not ofsetting (players from both benches came off) Then red should have shot two more shots for the T on white for having bench personnel come on to the floor.

6) Once all shots taken this ends the quarter and new quarter starts...

[just another ref]

Enough, already. Camron nailed it. The personal foul happened as time expired in the first quarter.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Enough, already. Camron nailed it. The personal foul happened as time expired in the first quarter.

Was it on a shot, then?

[shishstripes]

If you got people streaming onto the court from all directions, I am surprised that the game did not get called???

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Was it on a shot, then?

no