How would this hypothetical be sorted out?

[Lotto]

Here's how we'd proceed under NCAA rules, where T's work differently: Team B shoots two FTs for the T, then we go to POI, which is A1's substitute shooting 3 FTs. If the foul by B1 is ruled a common foul, then players occupy the lane spaces and play continues normally after the last FT. If the foul by B1 is ruled intentional, no one occupies the lane spaces and A gets a throw-in at the spot nearest where the foul occurred after the last FT.

[Jimmie24]

Why isn't B ejected? 4-18-2 sure has an argument here.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Jimmie24

Why isn't B ejected? 4-18-2 sure has an argument here.

4-18-2: An attempt to instigate a fight by committing an unsporting act that causes a person to retaliate by fighting.

Maybe. However, strictly speaking, B1 possibly didn't attempt to start a fight. Our judgment; it's why we get paid.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

4-18-2: An attempt to instigate a fight by committing an unsporting act that causes a person to retaliate by fighting.

Maybe. However, strictly speaking, B1 possibly didn't attempt to start a fight. Our judgment; it's why we get paid.

Don't have my book, but I thought there was a case play for this that basically said a borderline act that actually leads to a fight should be considered fighting as well.

[Jimmie24]

There was a case play in years past that showed a hard foul and a retalliation punch equaled a fight by both players.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Don't have my book, but I thought there was a case play for this that basically said a borderline act that actually leads to a fight should be considered fighting as well.

Originally Posted by Jimmie24

There was a case play in years past that showed a hard foul and a retalliation punch equaled a fight by both players.

I remember this as well. A borderline act would need to be clearly defined though. A hard foul (excessive contact) does that. It does lead to an unequal penalty, though.

Oddly enough, I was assigned a regional final for last night and I had an excessive contact foul (b1 against A1) where the contact did gather some attention by other A players.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Lotto

Here's how we'd proceed under NCAA rules, where T's work differently: Team B shoots two FTs for the T, then we go to POI, which is A1's substitute shooting 3 FTs. If the foul by B1 is ruled a common foul, then players occupy the lane spaces and play continues normally after the last FT. If the foul by B1 is ruled intentional, no one occupies the lane spaces and A gets a throw-in at the spot nearest where the foul occurred after the last FT.

I thought a flagrant dead ball contact included the throwin.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I thought a flagrant dead ball contact included the throwin.

NCAAM v. NCAAW

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

10-3 Art. 17. Fighting as in Rule 4-26.
PENALTY: (Arts. 13 through 17) Flagrant technical fouls. Two free
throws shall be awarded to any player on the offended
team, unless double fouls are assessed. For double flagrant
technical fouls, no free throws are awarded. For any
flagrant technical foul, the ball shall be awarded to the
offended team at the point of interruption. When a single
flagrant technical foul occurs during intermission for
the second or any extra period, play shall resume with a
throw-in to the offended team on either side of midcourt....

So yes, Team B should have a throw-in in the OP's scenario.

Is this NCAA?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

10-3 Art. 17. Fighting as in Rule 4-26.
PENALTY: (Arts. 13 through 17) Flagrant technical fouls. Two free
throws shall be awarded to any player on the offended
team, unless double fouls are assessed. For double flagrant
technical fouls, no free throws are awarded. For any
flagrant technical foul, the ball shall be awarded to the
offended team at the point of interruption. When a single
flagrant technical foul occurs during intermission for
the second or any extra period, play shall resume with a
throw-in to the offended team on either side of midcourt....

So yes, Team B should have a throw-in in the OP's scenario.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Is this NCAA?

Yep...don't have any NFHS stuff with me.

[Adam]

I should add here that in order for me to consider B's foul a flagrant due to the fight that ensued, it would have had to be bad enough for me to think about it without the fight. I don't want to penalize B with a flagrant just because A can't keep his head.

[Lotto]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

10-3 Art. 17. Fighting as in Rule 4-26.
PENALTY: (Arts. 13 through 17) Flagrant technical fouls. Two free
throws shall be awarded to any player on the offended
team, unless double fouls are assessed. For double flagrant
technical fouls, no free throws are awarded. For any
flagrant technical foul, the ball shall be awarded to the
offended team at the point of interruption. When a single
flagrant technical foul occurs during intermission for
the second or any extra period, play shall resume with a
throw-in to the offended team on either side of midcourt....

So yes, Team B should have a throw-in in the OP's scenario.

This is an out of date quote of the rule. 10-3.13-17 PENALTY changed this year. It applies to NCAAW only and now directs the use of POI after a flagrant T.

For NCAAM, the relevant rule is 10-5 RESUMPTION OF PLAY, which states that a single intentional or flagrant T resumes with a throw-in by the offended team at the division line. My mistake in my earlier post for not including this.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Lotto

This is an out of date quote of the rule. 10-3.13-17 PENALTY changed this year. It applies to NCAAW only and now directs the use of POI after a flagrant T.

For NCAAM, the relevant rule is 10-5 RESUMPTION OF PLAY, which states that a single intentional or flagrant T resumes with a throw-in by the offended team at the division line. My mistake in my earlier post for not including this.

You are correct Lotto, I didn't even pay attention to the fact that 10-3 applies to NCAA-W only. My bad.

Rule 10-5 (MEN) CLASS A Unsporting Technical Infractions
Art 1. RESUMPTION OF PLAY: For any technical foul(s), play shall resume at the point of interruption except for a single intentional or a single flagrant technical foul. For a single intentional or a single flagrant technical foul, the ball shall be awarded to the offended team at a designated spot at the division line on either side of the playing court.

10-3 (WOMEN) Player/Substitute Technical Fouls
Art. 17 Fighting as in Rule 4-26.
PENALTY: (Arts. 13 through 17) Flagrant technical fouls.. Two free throws shall be awarded to any player on the offended
team, unless double fouls are assessed. For double flagrant technical fouls, no free throws are awarded. For any flagrant technical foul, the ball shall be awarded to the offended team at the point of interruption. When a single flagrant technical foul occurs during intermission for the second or any extra period, play shall resume with a throw-in to the offended team on either side of midcourt...

[jeffpea]

Originally Posted by Lotto

Here's how we'd proceed under NCAA rules, where T's work differently: Team B shoots two FTs for the T, then we go to POI, which is A1's substitute shooting 3 FTs. If the foul by B1 is ruled a common foul, then players occupy the lane spaces and play continues normally after the last FT. If the foul by B1 is ruled intentional, no one occupies the lane spaces and A gets a throw-in at the spot nearest where the foul occurred after the last FT.

If this is NCAA-M, you have forgotten that the Flagrant Technical Foul by A1 (his punch to B1s' jaw) results in an ejection of A1 and a throw-in for Team B at a spot nearest the foul. (this occurs after the sub for A1 shoots the 3 FT's first....then B shoots 2 FT's for Flagrant Technical).



By rule, you do not use POI for an Intentional Technical Foul (contact that is deemed excessive during a dead ball) or for a Flagrant Technical Foul (an act that is deemed to be combative or severe contact)

[Lotto]

Originally Posted by jeffpea

If this is NCAA-M, you have forgotten that the Flagrant Technical Foul by A1 (his punch to B1s' jaw) results in an ejection of A1 and a throw-in for Team B at a spot nearest the foul. (this occurs after the sub for A1 shoots the 3 FT's first....then B shoots 2 FT's for Flagrant Technical).



By rule, you do not use POI for an Intentional Technical Foul (contact that is deemed excessive during a dead ball) or for a Flagrant Technical Foul (an act that is deemed to be combative or severe contact)

My mistake---I was using NCAAW rules, where you do go to POI after a flagrant T.