One shot, two shots or three shots.

[wbrown]

Situation A1 is driving to the basket for an easy lay-up, B1 pushes A1 from behind. A1 scores the basket. The trail referee calls an intentional personal foul.


My question is how many foul shots do you shoot? The NFHS book says two shots and ball out of bounds for an intentional foul.

I have asked several referees and one rules interpreter. Some referee say one, some say two and the rules interpreter said three. His reasoning which I know is wrong was that an intentional foul is a technical foul, so you shoot one for the foul and two for the technical. I disagree with that ruling since an intentional foul can be either a personal or technical. In this case it was a personal foul.

Your thoughts please.

[referee99]

Originally Posted by wbrown

Situation A1 is driving to the basket for an easy lay-up, B1 pushes A1 from behind. A1 scores the basket. The trail referee calls an intentional personal foul.


My question is how many foul shots do you shoot? The NFHS book says two shots and ball out of bounds for an intentional foul.

I have asked several referees and one rules interpreter. Some referee say one, some say two and the rules interpreter said three. His reasoning which I know is wrong was that an intentional foul is a technical foul, so you shoot one for the foul and two for the technical. I disagree with that ruling since an intentional foul can be either a personal or technical. In this case it was a personal foul.

Your thoughts please.

I think you have an opinion... and that you will be right.
What does that darn rules book say again?

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by wbrown

The NFHS book says two shots and ball out of bounds for an intentional foul.

What more do you need to know?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by wbrown

The NFHS book says two shots and ball out of bounds for an intentional foul.

You don't believe the rule book?

[Adam]

Ask your rules interpreter if he'd shoot 4 for the intentional if the shot missed.

[wbrown]

I am just looking for a sanity check. I have been told I am a book referee and sometimes I think I might be wrong but I thought this was pretty clear to me.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by wbrown

I am just looking for a sanity check. I have been told I am a book referee and sometimes I think I might be wrong but I thought this was pretty clear to me.

Applying the proper penalty to a foul is not being a "book referee."

Misapplying the penalty makes a person a "rule-kicking official."

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by wbrown

I am just looking for a sanity check. I have been told I am a book referee and sometimes I think I might be wrong but I thought this was pretty clear to me.

Your rules interpreter needs a sanity check.

[referee99]

Originally Posted by wbrown

I am just looking for a sanity check. I have been told I am a book referee and sometimes I think I might be wrong but I thought this was pretty clear to me.

I was working a rec game with another HS official. On an inbounds pass, defender B1 reached through plane and touched ball. He issued DOG warning. Later I asked partner, "the ball was released, and then B1 touched it?" He said "yes, I gave delay of game warning". I said, "I believe that once the pass is released, that the defender can reach through and touch the ball."

This leads (in a between game office setting) to a 'go around the room and ask everyone's opinion' session. Other officials, site administrators and such. At the end I get a big "SEE!?!" when everyone agreed with him and not me.... even after I read them the rules book restrictions on defender in that sitch!!

So, I know how you can sometimes feel like you are from another planet...

I would take the label "Rules Book Official" as a compliment.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by wbrown

I am just looking for a sanity check. I have been told I am a book referee and sometimes I think I might be wrong but I thought this was pretty clear to me.

Knowing the book backwards and forwards is never a bad thing as long as you know how to put it on the floor....not just knowing the rule but knowing when to apply it the right way for the right circumstance.

Also, the "book referee" comments sometimes come from those that are trying to deflect attention from their lack of rules knowledge....ones who wing it and try to polish over thier deficiencies by either charming the coaches or putting down their peers.

Having both (extensive rules knowledge AND the ability to work a great game) is not mutually exclusive.

[ma_ref]

Originally Posted by wbrown

the rules interpreter said three. His reasoning which I know is wrong was that an intentional foul is a technical foul, so you shoot one for the foul and two for the technical.

That is scary. Your board might want to think about getting a new interpreter...

[wbrown]

Earlier in this post I asked about how many shots on an intentinal foul.

Very simular situation. A1 drive to the basket B1 pushes A1 from behind real hard into the wall the basket is good. The trail referee call a flagrant technical foul and ejects the player. They then shoot one for the foul and two for the technical. Is this correct?

[dbking]

There are several things to consider in this situation...

Is the ball live or dead. The ball becomes dead when it goes through the hoop in this situation.

This decision must be made before you can continue.

If ball is live, the second decision is whether or not the foul was intentional or not.

If not, count basket and one FT. If yes, count basket and two FTs Ball is inbounded by team that was fouled nearest spot of foul.

The third decision is whether or not it is flagrant or not. If no, nothing else, if yes, then you have an ejection and paperwork etc.

If ball is dead, the second decision is whether or not contact should be ignored or not.

In this case I think it can not be ignored. No you have a technical foul. Now you must determine if flagrant or not.

Count basket, two FTs and the ball on division line opposite table.

So many decisions. I recommend that before you report any of this, you send both teams to bench area and have a conference with your partner(s) and make sure you are both on same page and you go through the entire sequence of what is going to happen.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by wbrown

Earlier in this post I asked about how many shots on an intentinal foul.

Very simular situation. A1 drive to the basket B1 pushes A1 from behind real hard into the wall the basket is good. The trail referee call a flagrant technical foul and ejects the player. They then shoot one for the foul and two for the technical. Is this correct?

No. Only one foul was issued: therefore only one penalty is applied. There are no penalties where you enforce "the and 1" and two more.

Count the basket, report the flagrant foul, and award two shots.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by wbrown

Earlier in this post I asked about how many shots on an intentinal foul.

Very simular situation. A1 drive to the basket B1 pushes A1 from behind real hard into the wall the basket is good. The trail referee call a flagrant technical foul and ejects the player. They then shoot one for the foul and two for the technical. Is this correct?

Since they "shot one for the foul", the ball must have been live. So, the correct call is Flagrant Personal Foul, not Flagrant Technical foul.

And, one foul, one penalty.