Who to call the foul on?
 

:confused: In a HS Church/Rec playoff game. A1 grabbed an offensive rebound, came down and as he went back up for the shot, was fouled by two players, B1 and B2, at the same time. B1 on the right side hit shooting arm, and B2 on the left side, reaching over and hitting shooting arm. I whistled for the foul, then chose B1 for the foul since he was closer to the shooting arm. I was confused about this at first but knew I had to call it on someone. Is this just a judgement call at this point or is there any protocol to follow. Thanks!

if you know how many fouls each guy has...I give it to the one who has fewer fouls. or, i charge it to the player who has the smaller impact on the game (iow - give the better player a pass and charge it to the other guy)....

Come on have some fun how many multiple fouls do you get to call. Nail them both with a foul and shoot 2 free throws!!!!!:D

<font size=1>Good job...that should start a several page discussion...</font size> :D

Actually, in theory you could call a multiple foul - one foul on each player. In practice, however, it is almost always one foul on the player that you feel fouled "first", and the second is ignored (unless it was flagrant).

You'd make a great NBA official.:rolleyes:

I agree with you whole heartedly Jeff. That is the perfect situation to give the foul to the player with fewer fouls or the one that can have the least amount of impact on the game. By both of them fouling at virtually the same time it gives you leeway to do something like this.

Now that's not to say, the fouls happen, but with a decent amount of time in between. You can't pick and choose, you have to take the obvious first foul.

This has been said/discussed before.

I even recall one poster with another variation - if you know one guy is a starter and the other one is a sub just off the bench, give it to the sub!

First - this is as wrong as it gets. Second - why would you know how many fouls each player has? Do you work games where the fouls are posted on the scoreboard? Other than that, there should be no knowledge on your part of these numbers. Your comment is one of the reasons why. Call the game as it happens. It's up to the player's actions to determine the outcome, not your misguided sense of what has impact and what doesn't. Remember - be in control of the game without controlling the game.

<font size=1>(Ok, against my better judgement, here goes...)</font size>

What do you do in these instances, where B1 and B2 foul A1 about the same time?

- B1 has 4 fouls, and has been kinda mouthy all game, without really crossing the line, and B2 is a sub that rarely comes in the game. Would you still give the foul to the player with the least? Or would it be better to get rid of "the problem" in this case?

- What if "mouthy" B1 and "quiet" B2 both have the same number of fouls? Does it still matter? Or does your philosophy only apply to the number of fouls each player has?

- What if you're not sure who has the most fouls? Do you check at the table before deciding who to report the foul on?

- How does this philosophy jive with your signature line, where an official could ignore an action by one player to simply give the foul to a "more deserving" (or is it "less deserving"?) other player?

Why not simply observe the play and call the foul on the player that fouled first?

So who would YOU call the foul on Mark?? And what rationale would you use for your decision??

I would call the foul on whoever committed it first. If, by some miracle, they were both committed at exactly the same split second, then I would call a multiple foul.

Absent that, I'd call it on the kid with the worse looking haircut.

So if Ed Hightower were playing in your game.... :p

the games in which I work (D2, D3, NAIA, some HS) require more game management skills than other facets of officiating.....the way in which i handle the situation in the OP, is the way that I have managed that scenario in games (and you know what? NOBODY COMPLAINED when it happened - probably because nobody noticed)

those that I admire/trust who work at higher levels repeatedly say - "anyone can call traveling, see if someone stepped out of bounds, or call a block/charge play....it's the officials who can manage the game (players, coaches, score table, partners, etc) that rise to the highest level of officiating" (and since that's my goal - I've tried to emulate those successful behaviors)

i always want to know who the best players are, which players have 4 fouls, what style of play each team uses, how the coaches interact (or don't) w/ officials, what type/level of contact has been previously called a foul in the game, which players are the trouble makers, etc...

i do call the game as it happens - in a manner that is in accordance w/ the rules and in a manner that is fair for both teams....that's what an official does, to administer and adjudicate the rules in a fair manner.

Calling it on Ed would be easy. However, if these were the five guys on the court for a team, I wouldn't know who to choose!

http://www.plagueofthemullet.com/ima...s_mullets.jpeg

I'd charge the guy in the lower left corner w/ the foul- you CAN'T go bad facial hair w/ that haircut!....of course he's the keyboard player and backup singer - so he really is the LEAST important person on the team (I guess my philosopy works in ALL situations......:D

btw is it just me, or does it look like he came to this photo shoot straight from the hospital after working the midnight shift as a male nurse? what's with the "colorful" hospital scrub top he's wearin'?

I don't buy the whole "Call it on who has fewer fouls and who will make less of an impact on the game" crap. That's a copout so you don't have to look like the bad guy. Take care of business if you need to.

I'd either A) Call it on who I thought committed the foul first, or B) If I can't determine that, go with a multiple foul since they did both foul the shooter.

If one player's foul was "more of a foul", and I know one didn't happen before the other, I'll call that player for the foul. I won't however use a player's foul total to determine if he gets it or not.

I had one almost like this at the end of this season. Shooter A1 drives on a fast break right at the lower block on the lane. At pretty much the same time, I see what I think is a foul by B1 on A1's arm from behind him, and B2 is sliding over to try and take a charge. I call B2 for the block because it was "more of a foul" than B1's foul. I know that sounds funny but it's the best term I can come up with.

C'mon Mark, you can do better than that. You've never called 2 fouls on a player and was aware of a partner calling a thrd foul on that same player? You've never heard a PA guy announce how many fouls a player has?

The OP said B1 and B2 fouled at the same time.

Why is nobody going by the book and calling a multiple or false multiple?
 

If it literally was the same exact instant, the book clearly says (NF) that it is a multiple foul (4-19-11). If they weren't at the same instant, you could again refer to the book and call a False Multiple Foul (4-19-12).

Case play 4-19-12: B1 fouls airborne A1 who is in the act of shooting. Before shooter A1 returns one foot to the flor, he/she is fouled by B2 who has moved into A1's landing area. The ball (a) does or (b) does not, enter the basket.

Ruling This is a false multiple foul and each foul carries its own penalty. In (a) the goal is counted and A1 is awarded one free throw for each foul. In (b), A1 is awarded two free throws for each foul (10 Penalty 6, 7)

All of this call it on the weaker player, less fouls, bench player, etc shouldn't matter under HS rules...

Please people, we pick and choose all the time to not call a multiple foul. How you pick and choose is up to you. I do know that in a game I had this year where there was clearly not a multiple foul situation but the "star" fouled out as a result of my foul. You would have thought the sky fell by the way they reacted. If I had called a foul on another player, the reaction would have been different. Now because there is tape and I clearly would have to ignore what the star did, I called a foul on the star. I stuck with my call and it does not bother me, but if there was a multiple foul possibility where it is one or two players involved, I would have given the foul to the non-star in a minute. Or in some situations I had given the foul to the jerk player that has been causing problems all game long. I just know I am not calling a multiple foul.

Peace

Because it is a dumb foul to call. If you call that, you have now given two fouls to the same player on the same action. Something likely happened first and if you are not sure pick one. I have never seen anyone call a multiple foul and hope someone never does. I do not care what the casebook says. The casebook says a lot of things, I would advocate being nit-picky and calling everything no matter what. You will get more into a debate that it was not a multiple foul than it is worth arguing.

Peace

All I know is that in the games I work, I can't hardly think of a quicker way to commit career suicide than to come out with two fouls on different players on the same play. My assignor (yikes) would have a field day with that one. I can feel my ears burning now and I didn't even do it.:eek:

I think the baseball analogy would be the phrase, "The tie goes to the runner." I've been told the correct call is, "There's no such thing as a tie." The ball beat the runner, or the runner beat the ball, even if it's by a mere fraction of a second, and it's the umpire's job to determine which it is.

I think the same applies here - B1 and B2 didn't foul at the same time, one fouled right before the other, even though it was approximately the same time. Have you ever called, or have your partners ever called, a multiple foul on a relatively routine play like two defenders on a shooter?

Look, I get the theory of "game management". But it bothers me a little that we are, essentially, making a call based on what will cause us the least amount of grief, not what is correct. Sometimes, in that very situation, what is correct and what will cause us the least amount of grief are the same call. But, sometimes it's not. I'm uncomfortable with looking at a play, seeing A1 (the star) foul right before A2 (the sub), and purposely calling the foul on A2 <B>solely</B> because the coach and fans won't give me as much grief about the call, all in the name of "game management". There may be times where this is acceptable, and yes, I have made calls that were "by rule" incorrect, but ok by "game management standards". But I think where that line is drawn is different than "every time" in this type of play. It is too close, in my opinion, to simply using the excuse of "game management" to not make the correct, but unpopular calls, say, late in a close game.

The last thing I want is rocky's assigner calling me, so I'll never call the multiple on this.

I'll pick one; the hardest contact, the contact that most affected the shot, the first contact, the kid with the uglier Mom, the kid with the louder Dad, maybe even the kid who doesn't have four fouls. The situation itself will determine how I pick, but I'm going to pick.

I heard your assignor is good enough to read minds; even you thinking about such a thing is worth a phone call. :D

I'm calling it on the shorter player because he has no business being in the paint with the big fellas.

Look, I have no problem with not calling multiple fouls. I don't remember ever calling one myself. What I am saying is that when you choose to make the decision that one foul came before the other, you shouldn't use criteria such as which defender is the "star" player and/or which player has the most fouls. I guess a good criteria to use is which player's foul interfered the most with the ball handler's ability to do whatever they were trying to do.

As to not knowing (or caring) how many individual fouls a player has at any given time during a game, I try to ignore any indication of that, except if the total is five. In fact, I've told scorers numerous times not to state that stat to me or my partner (except for five, of course).

Whenever a situation occurs in which a player gets a lot of foul calls early, I switch to one of my alter personalities so I forget that it happened. I think Juulie's actually witnessed this happening.

Who do you think steals the ball from the big fellas?

The reason the "tie goes to the runner" theory does not work, because the rule says no such thing. The runner must beat the throw or tag. If there is a tie, the runner did not beat the throw or the tag and they are out.

This is why umpires often say, "The tie goes to the umpire." That usually means they are going to be out. ;)

Peace

And guess which one he is?

Mark, the problem is you're not determining which foul first. That's irrelevant on this play, since the ball was live the whole time. You're determining which one to call, and you've got to choose some criteria to use. You can flip a coin (or a point guard) for all I care. I'd prefer to base it on which contact had more effect on the shot.

M&M is a smart fella. Also, he's intelligent too. :)

He probably hasn't called a multiple foul, either. If two guys foul a shooter at the 'same time', does the shooter get 4 shots if he missed the shot?

Foul trouble wasn't a problem of mine.

I can tell you one thing, I am not going to try to explain it to any coach (you will have to explain this BTW).

Peace

Well, I wish I was as smart on my NCAA predictions as I was on my prediction about this thread... :)

True.

I probably haven't called this because I didn't know the answer. :) I looked it up, and it's actually on one of the last pages - 10-6-6: One FT for each foul, on a successful or unsuccessful 2-point try. So, what would really make things interesting is trying to explain to B's coach why, after B1 and B2 foul on a successful try, the basket counts AND A1 is going to shoot 2 FT's.

I thought that's what I said: "I guess a good criteria to use is which player's foul interfered the most with the ball handler's ability to do whatever they were trying to do."

Sad, but true!!

And Saqs is making the same point I am. You have to choose. The criteria I choose to use may be different than Mark's or M$M's (God, I hope it is :D), but that doesn't make me right and them wrong, or vice versa. But no way am I going with a multiple foul on this play!!

Sorry, I missed that. I got stuck on all the talk about who fouled first. My mistake.

Coach: That foul was on 40! Why'd you call it on 20?

Me: 20 is the one I was looking at, Coach.

Most of the time, even if you see two fouls, you have a better look at one than the other. Call the one you have the best look at. Simple solutions are usually best.

On the subject of multiple fouls, like most, I have never seen or called one. Never say never, but the only way I see myself jumping to make this call is if
both were intentional/flagrant.

:eek: Thanks for all the feedback. From some of the threads posted, it seems I made a good decision in calling the foul on the player who had more impact on the shot. I understand that it is difficult to determine simultaneous action. At this point in my short career (2 years), I did not process the points of game management as posted here in regards to: best player, most fouls, game impact, I just called a foul and tried to make the best decision as I saw it. Experience does play an important part in calling a game, as I have learned from many of you. I want to be able to call a fair game. Being fair to the players for the good play as well as violations they commit. I philosophically have a problem with picking and choosing a violation based on athletic ability. I try to be unbiased. Yes, I understand some of the game management issues, jeff... is referring to, which makes sense as he had addressed it from his years of experience, but I would have a tough time calling a violation based on player impact on the game. I appreciate everyone's input.

I have often tried to think of a scenario in which I would ever call a multiple foul. I think it would have to be two defensive players crashing into an airborne shooter from two different sides at the same time and so hard that the shooter would come down in a screaming heap with both defenders on top on him. I could probably sell it, but still hope I never see that play.:eek:

I don't necessarily disagree; I was commenting on jeffpea's statement about using that as a reason to not call it on the "star", or the player with 4 fouls. For me, most of the time, the choice is easy - call it on the player that fouled first. Sometimes, it can be on the player that fouled harder instead. Very rarely will it be purposely on the player that has the least amount of fouls, especially if the additional reason is it will keep the coach or fans from getting upset.

Nyah, nyah, we agree! :p

Guys - the obvious answer is to call it on the player who didn't buy foul insurance. If they both bought it, call in on the kid with the highest deductible.

I hope I never see two guys simultaneously clobber, I mean foul, a shooter on a 3 point attempt.:eek:

And especially 2 guys who each have 4 fouls.

Methinks the total number of FT's will be more than what we've discussed. ;)

I might call it if both fouls were close to intentional. Hard enough I couldn't ignore them, but not quite bad enough to go intentional.

I call it on one or the other for many reasons...sometimes I call it on the player who has more hair (being tham I'm bald :D).

If given an equal choice between two players and I know the foul count, I just might make use of that information....but, in some cases, I may not. It doesn't come down to one thing....I give it to the player that "deserves" it the most. And since they both fouled, I either must call a multiple foul (not likely to happen), or, in absence of any rule that tells us what to do instead of calling a multiple foul, I get to decide however I like. I might even call it on the player that reacts most to the whistle..;). Or, I might call it on the one who reacts least.

It really all depends on what i had for lunch that day.

REMEMBER- you said in all these instances that B1 and B2 committed a foul at approximately the same time. In this case it gives you the leeway to choose:

In the first instance it is totally up to you. I have had the foul on the mouthy player before, unless of course the other player raises his hand, wanting to take the foul.

Can't really say what i would do in the 2nd instance.

No i don't check the fouls. if i know, then i can make a decision if i don't then i just pick one.

I'm not ignoring illegal contact or my signature. Illegal contact was committed and i called the foul. I did not ignore any illegal actions. In my league there are no "false multiple" fouls.

A lot of times one of the players will raise his hand really quick. Usually an indication that his teammate is a star or is in foul trouble. ;)

And, as I mentioned before, I don't believe in ties, so the word "approximately" still means one happened before the other. My choice would (most often) be the player that fouled first.

What if the player that raises his hand is simply trying to influence your decision in giving him the foul instead on the "star"? How would that be different than the higher % shooter walking to the FT line if there is some confusion as to which player got fouled?

Boy, this game's taking a long time while we stand around waiting for your decision... :)

Coin flip? Rock, paper, scissors? :) Why not make the decision based on who fouled first?

However, if you call the foul on the "sub", instead of the "star", and it was the star that fouled first, then yes, by rule, you are both ignoring the illegal contact/foul, AND calling a foul on a player that didn't commit one. (If you are not calling a multiple or false multiple foul, then the second contact is ignored unless intentional or flagrant.)

I was simply responding to your statement:
In rare instances, I can see doing this, but not as a blanket statement that all officials should follow every time. I would prefer to give the foul to the player that committed the foul.

Remember, there are no ties (just like baseball), so one happened before the other. Perhaps the second foul was harder, so you rule the first contact incidental. That's fine. But I can't find any rule, case, mention in the "Simplified and Illustrated", NCAA memo, or note from any of my assignors mentioing your philosophy. It sounds a lot like making the "least objectionable call" instead of the right call. Maybe in rare instances that can be done, but never as a common occurance.

And all this time I thought you were just helping the environment by wearing solar panels on your head. ;)

I thought he wore those at work to help make processors more green. :D

[QUOTE=M&M Guy;591392]And, as I mentioned before, I don't believe in ties, so the word "approximately" still means one happened before the other. My choice would (most often) be the player that fouled first.


For reference of timeframe for approximately the same time will be seen as: FOUL-FOUL A foul that is distinctly apart would be: FOUL---FOUL with a small amount of time in between.

If they happen approximately at the same time then why not give it to the guy raising his hand. This is part of managing the game. Everybody sees that a guy is asking for a foul, so give it to him. Now if the "star" as you call him, OBVIOUSLY fouls before the player raising his hand then you have no choice but to give it to him, even if the "sub" raises his hand cause on tape, it is going to show that the obvious first foul is on the "star".


I'm just saying I would have to be in the game to make a decision.

I'm not saying that you shouldn't do that. If you know EXACTLY who fouled with only .1 or .2 tenths of a second in between the two fouls happening and there are no issues whatsoever in the game, go right ahead and get the "first one", whichever it was. Which one was it again that hit him first? B1 or B2?

I'll tell you this, when fouls are .1/.2 tenths of a second apart, I could do any, many, miny, mo and be right. ha


Sometimes you have to do what you gotta do to survive and sometimes you have to step up and take the hit and do the right thing. I believe calling a foul on a "sub" vs. "star" with no more than .1/.2 tenths b/w fouls is doing what you have to do to not cause any more stink in the game, especially when the "sub" is raising his hand!

I know we aren't changing each others mind, but this is good for people sitting on the sidelines and reading. It lets them decide how they want to ref.

M&M, unless i feel it is absolutely necessary or i need to clarify something i said (which is very possible), I am bowing out of this debate. The last word is all yours. I believe this has been healthy and good for you, I and all who have read it.

The simple answer is this:
If you have multiple fouls, call the foul on the player who calling the foul on would show your 'diversity-awareness'.

I don't have my book in front of me, but I'm pretty sure multiple fouls are not the same as simultaneous fouls.

Multiple = Two Team B players fouling the same Team A player

Simultaneous = A1 fouls B1 and B2 fouls A2 at the same time

Double = A1 and B1 foul each other at the same time

It Depends On What Base They're Running To ???
 

Here's what I heard. Keep in mind that I only officiate basketball, but I'm a baseball fan, and my children have played baseball ,or softball.

THE TIE RULE MYTH

There is no such thing in the world of umpiring. The runner is either out or safe. The umpire must judge out or safe. It is impossible to judge a tie. Lets look at the rules (OBR) 6.05 deals with a batter becoming a runner and 7.08 deals with a runner going to 2nd, 3rd, or Home.

6.05 A batter is out when: After he hits a fair ball, he or first base is tagged before he touches first base. Here, as it relates to time, the rule states the runner must be tagged before he touches first base. So if they were to happen at the same time, the runner would be safe because the runner was not tagged “before”.

7.08 Any runner is out when: He fails to reach the next base before a fielder tags him or the base, after he has been forced to advance by reason of the batter becoming a runner. Here it states that the runner must reach the base before the ball, thus a perception of time being a tie, the runner would be out.

With my limited knowledge of baseball rules, I have concluded that a tie goes to runner at first, and tie goes to fielders at the other bases.

Not quite: assuming we're talking about 1B, the umpire's job is to determine whether or not the runner beat the ball. In a so-called tie, the runner did not beat the ball, so he's out. :cool:

Edited to add: BillyMac, professional instruction is to enforce the standard of 7.08 and ignore that of 6.05.