2 Team mates Foul 2 Opponents

[mbyron]

My first thought when reading the OP was "false multiple foul." The sticky one is, of course, the one Nevada brings up: the case where the two fouls are team fouls #6 and #7.

For exactly one of these fouls the penalty is 1-and-1, so we need to be able to pick who should shoot. But this is arbitrary, just like picking who shoots first if they both have to shoot. Let the R pick based on 2-3.

If you have 2 shooters, would you shoot the first with the lane cleared?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by mbyron

1) Let the R pick based on 2-3.

2) If you have 2 shooters, would you shoot the first with the lane cleared?

1) Yup.
2)Yup. Rule 8-1-3 sez you don't line up when the ball becomes dead on an unsuccessful last FT of a "specific" penalty. That "specific" penalty is the first 1/1. Line 'em up for the 2nd. 1/1.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

1) Yup.
2)Yup. Rule 8-3 sez you don't line up when the ball becomes dead on an unsuccessful last FT of a "specific" penalty. That "specific" penalty is the first 1/1. Line 'em up for the 2nd. 1/1.

It continues to be important when one shooter is awarded 1+1, and the other shooter 2 shots.

This happens when the fouls are the 9th and 10th of the half.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

It continues to be important when one shooter is awarded 1+1, and the other shooter 2 shots.

This happens when the fouls are the 9th and 10th of the half.

No, it doesn't matter diddlysquat under 8-1-3 which one you pick to shoot first. Whichever ever one you choose to shoot first, the ball is still dead on an unsucessful last FT for that "specific" penalty, whether that FT is the first or second of a 1/1, or the second of 2 shots.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by mbyron

For exactly one of these fouls the penalty is 1-and-1, so we need to be able to pick who should shoot. But this is arbitrary, just like picking who shoots first if they both have to shoot. Let the R pick based on 2-3.

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

1) Yup.
2)Yup. Rule 8-1-3 sez you don't line up when the ball becomes dead on an unsuccessful last FT of a "specific" penalty. That "specific" penalty is the first 1/1. Line 'em up for the 2nd. 1/1.

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

It continues to be important when one shooter is awarded 1+1, and the other shooter 2 shots.

This happens when the fouls are the 9th and 10th of the half.

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

No, it doesn't matter diddlysquat under 8-1-3 which one you pick to shoot first. Whichever ever one you choose to shoot first, the ball is still dead on an unsucessful last FT for that "specific" penalty, whether that FT is the first or second of a 1/1, or the second of 2 shots.

I believe that you missed my point.

If it is true that it matters which player is issued a foul that is deemed to be the team's 6th of the half, and therefore the other foul is the team's 7th of a half, then it is equally important when it comes to 9 and 10. This is because the penalties for 9 and 10 and different, just as they are for fouls 6 and 7.

My point is that a coach should have a preference which player shoots the 1+1 and which player shoots the 2, just as he would (most likely) want the better FT shooter to be the bonus in the 6/7th foul situation.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

My point is that a coach should have a preference which player shoots the 1+1 and which player shoots the 2, just as he would (most likely) want the better FT shooter to be the bonus in the 6/7th foul situation.

Who cares if the the coach has a preference? The point of this whole thread is that the rules don't definitively cover which player shoots. Everything else IS covered. You can't make one of the fouls disappear if both officials are adamant that their call will stand. You still have to penalize both fouls under that circumstance. You do have rules coverage in R2-3 that will allow the R to pick which foul was the seventh though and who shoots. The coach does NOT have a say under any circumstances.....he has to accepts the R's choice.

Never worry about what the coach thinks. Worry about what your Assignor/Evaluator thinks. They are God.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Who cares if the the coach has a preference? The point of this whole thread is that the rules don't definitively cover which player shoots. Everything else IS covered. You can't make one of the fouls disappear if both officials are adamant that their call will stand. You still have to penalize both fouls under that circumstance. You do have rules coverage in R2-3 that will allow the R to pick which foul was the seventh though and who shoots. The coach does NOT have a say under any circumstances.....he has to accepts the R's choice.

Never worry about what the coach thinks. Worry about what your Assignor/Evaluator thinks. They are God.

Believe me, you never have to worry about me worrying what a coach thinks. It is clearly worthwhile to know that a coach will have a preference. This is because knowing that a coach will have a preference will prepare one for a method of dealing with that conversation.

I am not sure why you are stressing that the coach doesn't have a say. Everybody here understands that. And I know that you know that I know that.

If you claim that 2-3 says the R chooses who shoots because of the 7th foul, then he also chooses who shoots because of the 9th and 10th foul. Since these fouls carry different penalties, the effect of R's choice is not zero.

[JugglingReferee]

I think we need to do something to at least attempt to determine which foul happened first. Perhaps one calling official saw something peripherally regarding the other foul, or the durations between foul and whistle can be contrasted. To make no attempt, and go with 2-3, I think is not trying enough. Yes, it is very difficult, but we have to try.

Yes, the lane should be cleared if there are two shooters.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

I think we need to do something to at least attempt to determine which foul happened first. Perhaps one calling official saw something peripherally regarding the other foul, or the durations between foul and whistle can be contrasted. To make no attempt, and go with 2-3, I think is not trying enough. Yes, it is very difficult, but we have to try.

R.I.F.

What part of "Ideally, the 2 officials will come to some kind of agreement that one foul actually did occur before the other one....which means that the second foul is ignored(unless intentional or flagrant). If the two officials can't decide between themselves whether one foul occurred before the other though, use the procedure outlined above." didn't you get?

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

R.I.F.

What part of "Ideally, the 2 officials will come to some kind of agreement that one foul actually did occur before the other one....which means that the second foul is ignored(unless intentional or flagrant). If the two officials can't decide between themselves whether one foul occurred before the other though, use the procedure outlined above." didn't you get?

So in other words, we're on the same page!

What does it matter if I post something an hour later than you do, and it leads to the same fact?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

What does it matter if I post something an hour later than you do, and it eludes to the same fact?

Eluding the facts is a dangerous and undesirable practice.

[ma_ref]

I believe this scenario is covered under rule 11:

11-5-1: In situations where officials have simultaneous or near-simultaneous whistles involving fouls on the same team against different players, all officials huddle together closely. They shall pretend to talk to one another and occasionally nod their heads to make it appear as though they're having a meaningful discussion. Meanwhile, out of view from spectators and game personnel, 1 official secretly flips a coin to determine which foul really happened first. The official who wins the coin flip then reports their foul to the table, and the other official(s) return to their correct position on the playing court.

[Amesman]

Originally Posted by ma_ref

I believe this scenario is covered under rule 11:

11-5-1: In situations where officials have simultaneous or near-simultaneous whistles involving fouls on the same team against different players, all officials huddle together closely. They shall pretend to talk to one another and occasionally nod their heads to make it appear as though they're having a meaningful discussion. Meanwhile, out of view from spectators and game personnel, 1 official secretly flips a coin to determine which foul really happened first. The official who wins the coin flip then reports their foul to the table, and the other official(s) return to their correct position on the playing court.

Does the official whose call didn't count get to keep the coin?