The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 04, 2009, 12:19pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Mid-Hudson valley, New York
Posts: 751
Send a message via AIM to Lotto
The NCAA ruling is different

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.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 04, 2009, 12:27pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: AZ
Posts: 96
Why isn't B ejected? 4-18-2 sure has an argument here.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 04, 2009, 12:36pm
Fav theme: Roundball Rock
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Near Dog River (sorta)
Posts: 8,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmie24 View Post
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.
__________________
Pope Francis
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 04, 2009, 12:39pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by JugglingReferee View Post
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.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 04, 2009, 12:45pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: AZ
Posts: 96
There was a case play in years past that showed a hard foul and a retalliation punch equaled a fight by both players.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 04, 2009, 12:53pm
Fav theme: Roundball Rock
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Near Dog River (sorta)
Posts: 8,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmie24 View Post
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.
__________________
Pope Francis
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 04, 2009, 12:38pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lotto View Post
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.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 04, 2009, 12:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
I thought a flagrant dead ball contact included the throwin.
NCAAM v. NCAAW
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 04, 2009, 01:46pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef View Post
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?
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 04, 2009, 01:58pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
Is this NCAA?
Yep...don't have any NFHS stuff with me.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 04, 2009, 03:41pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
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.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 04, 2009, 02:41pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Mid-Hudson valley, New York
Posts: 751
Send a message via AIM to Lotto
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 04, 2009, 04:06pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lotto View Post
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...
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR

Last edited by Raymond; Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 04:11pm.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 04, 2009, 01:57pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lotto View Post
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)
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 04, 2009, 02:35pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Mid-Hudson valley, New York
Posts: 751
Send a message via AIM to Lotto
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffpea View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hypothetical time Mark Padgett Basketball 19 Sun Apr 13, 2008 03:27am
Hypothetical situation stevenstat Lacrosse 5 Fri Apr 16, 2004 11:36am
tagging up..hypothetical.. learnintheropes Softball 15 Thu May 15, 2003 09:53am
Hypothetical Situation SMEngmann Basketball 6 Tue Mar 04, 2003 07:36pm
Hypothetical situation trainerkg Basketball 17 Thu Apr 19, 2001 11:58am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:35am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1