Singler Elbow to Hansbrough's Jaw

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by dahoopref

I agree with you assessment that incidental contact should be ignored; I do not think that the elbow was incidental. But a common foul (such as a slap on the arm that neither intentional or flagrant) during a dead ball is still an intentional technical foul; do we agree?

Why could it not be a Flagrant Technical?

Peace

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by dahoopref

I agree with you assessment that incidental contact should be ignored; I do not think that the elbow was incidental. But a common foul (such as a slap on the arm that neither intentional or flagrant) during a dead ball is still an intentional technical foul; do we agree?

(The below ignores the "airborne shooter" possibility since it's not relevant to the play.)

Your terms are very confusing. You can't have a "common foul" during a dead ball.

Contact during a dead ball is IGNORED unless it's intentional or flagrant. Then, it's either an IT or FT foul.

Your "slap on the arm" would most likely be ignored. (I'm talking about the rule; as officials we might address the situation without calling a foul.)

[OHBBREF]

Originally Posted by dahoopref

I'm just wondering why the officials didn't go to the monitor to confirm the elbow (which I'm sure the C saw). It was my understanding that any punch/elbow needed to be review with a monitor to make sure it wasn't thrown intentionally.

For NCAA Men only they can go to the monitor to determine if a called foul is flagrant. They do not have to go -

In NCAA women it a punch is thrown/ or an action could possibly be a fight you must go to the monitor to make that determination but you may not up grade a foul that has been called to flagrant.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by dahoopref

I agree with you assessment that incidental contact should be ignored; I do not think that the elbow was incidental. But a common foul (such as a slap on the arm that neither intentional or flagrant) during a dead ball is still an intentional technical foul; do we agree?

No. For dead ball contact to be called, it must be either intentional of flagrant.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I can't view YouTube at work. But Singler did receive an Intentional Technical foul last night and NC took the ball out at half court. Was this the play or a different one? I wasn't paying close attention to the TV but wasn't Singler's T after some kind of scrum for a loose ball?

Carolina did NOT get the ball after the T.

Duke got the ball at the division line.

I hope someone can explain why because it made no sense to me.

[bigda65]

BB ref is correct. The ball was given to Duke at the division line, tableside (I believe).

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Carolina did NOT get the ball after the T.

Duke got the ball at the division line.

I hope someone can explain why because it made no sense to me.

Because the play was blown dead on the jump ball, they went to the AP arrow.

-Josh

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Carolina did NOT get the ball after the T.

Duke got the ball at the division line.

I hope someone can explain why because it made no sense to me.

I believe it's because they go to POI in NCAA after a technical.

Edit: jdmara just clarified.

[bigda65]

I am a Carolina fan, but I think the contact was incidental. He was pulling really hard on the ball, hand slips - hence the elbow.

Now he probably shouldnt have been pulling so hard on the ball, because of the whistle.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by zm1283

I believe it's because they go to POI in NCAA after a technical.

Edit: jdmara just clarified.

Not on a dead ball intentional contact Technical. This is the only Men's T given where you put the ball at the division line. I will have to look this up and confirm, but this T should not be a POI administration.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Carolina did NOT get the ball after the T.

Duke got the ball at the division line.

I hope someone can explain why because it made no sense to me.

Oh, must have heard the info wrong. A D-League buddy of mine called to asked what happened on the play b/c he couldn't figure out what was going on either.

In the closed thread Bob said the admin seemed correct. But I don't see how it can be correct if a dead ball foul of some type was called on Singler that involved contact.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Not on a dead ball intentional contact Technical. This is the only Men's T given where you put the ball at the division line. I will have to look this up and confirm, but this T should not be a POI administration.

Peace

You are correct, no need to look it up. A couple years ago there were False Double Fouls in the BC/Duke game that involved a taunting T against A1 followed up by a Intentional Contact Technical against B1. After administration Team A received the ball at the division line as a result of the foul against B1.

[BktBallRef]

NCAA 4-53-1e

Point of interruption is a procedure used to resume play because:

Any technical foul(s).

Exceptions: (Men) single intentional technical foul
and single flagrant technical foul.

NCAA 7-5-7

After a technical foul, a player of the offended team may attempt
the free throws and the ball shall be put back in play at the point of
interruption.

Exceptions: (Men)

Flagrant technical foul and intentional technical
foul, play shall resume by awarding the ball to the offended team at a
designated spot at the division line on either side of the playing court.

Help me out!

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Oh, must have heard the info wrong. A D-League buddy of mine called to asked what happened on the play b/c he couldn't figure out what was going on either.

In the closed thread Bob said the admin seemed correct. But I don't see how it can be correct if a dead ball foul of some type was called on Singler that involved contact.



You are correct, no need to look it up. A couple years ago there were False Double Fouls in the BC/Duke game that involved a taunting T against A1 followed up by a Intentional Contact Technical against B1. After administration Team A received the ball at the division line as a result of the foul against B1.

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

NCAA 4-53-1e

Point of interruption is a procedure used to resume play because:

Any technical foul(s).

Exceptions: (Men) single intentional technical foul
and single flagrant technical foul.

NCAA 7-5-7

After a technical foul, a player of the offended team may attempt
the free throws and the ball shall be put back in play at the point of
interruption.

Exceptions: (Men)

Flagrant technical foul and intentional technical
foul, play shall resume by awarding the ball to the offended team at a
designated spot at the division line on either side of the playing court.

Help me out!

I stand corrected. I guess I can leave work now, I learned something new already.

-Josh

[OHBBREF]

Rule 10.
Section 5 (MEN) CLASS A Unsporting Technical Infractions
RESUMPTION OF PLAY: For any technical foul(s), play shall resume at the point of ineteruption except for a single intentional or a single Flagrant technical foul. For a single intetional or a single flagrant technical, the ball shall be awarded to the offended team at a designated spot at the division line on either side of the playing court.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by dahoopref

I agree with you assessment that incidental contact should be ignored; I do not think that the elbow was incidental. But a common foul (such as a slap on the arm that neither intentional or flagrant) during a dead ball is still an intentional technical foul; do we agree?

The elbow was anything but incidental. It was properly called a technical foul since the ball was dead following the call for a held ball. Since the contact was "intentional or flagrant" it should be penalized by a Technical Foul (under NFHS rules).

But a slap on the arm or other non-intentional, non-flagrant contact is to be ignored under such circumstances. Therefore, no, a technical foul should not be called for non-intentional, non-flagrant contact -- it is to be ignored.