Need some help on this one

[Rufus]

I'm in the process of transitioning to 3-man and was working a scrimmage tonight with two other newbies (with one of board members supervising). Here's the situation we had:

A had 3 team fouls, B had 5 team fouls. A leading by a couple of points with about 30 seconds left in the game.

I'm trail and A1 is dribbling the ball with B1 closely guarding. B1 then reaches and makes contact with A1. I call the illegal use of hands and, before I can move to report the foul, A1 turns and bounces the ball. The ball bounces and glances off B1 (nothing intentional in A1's action in my opinion) who takes exception and flings the ball into A1's head. I call the T on B1 (should've tossed him, I know, but bear with me). As I'm walking to the table A1 apparently gets behind B1 close enough to check for lice and is telling him what he can do with himself. One of my partners whacks him with a T for unsportsmanlike.

My question(s) are:

1. The first foul by B1 gave B 6 team fouls putting A in the bonus on the next common foul. The two technicals were, I believe, a false double technical foul and each should have carried it's own penalty (i.e., A shoots two, then B shoots two, then B gets the ball at the division line). Is that correct?
2. What about if the technicals occured at approximately the same time making it a double technical? You count all the fouls toward each teamls foul count (A would have 4, B would have 7), don't shoot any free throws, and go to the point of interuption (in this case a throw in for A where A1 got hacked), correct?

Any help in untangling this would be appreciated.

[wanja]

Originally Posted by Rufus

What about if the technicals occured at approximately the same time making it a double technical? You count all the fouls toward each teamls foul count (A would have 4, B would have 7), don't shoot any free throws, and go to the point of interuption (in this case a throw in for A where A1 got hacked), correct?

Seems like you got it all right but could be more specific on the rationale for the throw-in in the case above. Team A is entitled to the throw in per rule 4-36-2b which defines the point of interruption as:

A free throw or a throw-in when the interruption occurred during this activity or if a team is entitled to such.

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by wanja

Seems like you got it all right but could be more specific on the rationale for the throw-in in the case above. Team A is entitled to the throw in per rule 4-36-2b which defines the point of interruption as:

A free throw or a throw-in when the interruption occurred during this activity or if a team is entitled to such.

A double foul with two T's would hypothetically be A1 and B1 pushing each other at the same time, correct? So if that happened, report the initial common foul on B1, report the double technicals, then give the ball to A1 at the spot nearest the foul.

[Lotto]

If A1's unsportsmanlike actions followed right on top of B1's unsportsmanlike actions, then I would be tempted to rule this a double technical since they happened at approximately the same time.

Originally Posted by Rufus

I call the illegal use of hands and, before I can move to report the foul, A1 turns and bounces the ball. The ball bounces and glances off B1 (nothing intentional in A1's action in my opinion) who takes exception and flings the ball into A1's head.

Being patient & observing the dead ball action was great on your part! Had B1 chose to attempt a punch, you would have enough info not to run A1.

[Rufus]

Thanks for all the feedback, it has helped clear up what was a somewhat confusing situation at the time. We did not handle it well during the scrimmage but came up with the "right" call afterward. The most important thing, as one of my partners pointed out, is that we learned from the experience in a scrimmage and will know better what to do when/if it happens again.

Originally Posted by Lotto

If A1's unsportsmanlike actions followed right on top of B1's unsportsmanlike actions, then I would be tempted to rule this a double technical since they happened at approximately the same time.

We talked about this with our board member and we settled on it being the extension of the same play so we would be more inclined to go with the double technical. If there were a couple of minutes in between, or the second technical happened in a separate action somewhere else on the court, we would have been more inclined to go false double.

[Back In The Saddle]

Some folks may have a more objective guideline than this, but for me...

If they both happened during the same dead ball period, if the one is a retaliation for the other, if it doesn't feel like we've "moved on" to the next play or activity, if it doesn't feel like it's been "too long" between the two, I'd rule it a double technical which simplifies the penalty enforcement and makes the penalties more equitable.

I realize that "feel" and "moved on" and "too long" are subjective, which makes it difficult to discuss or to quantify. But, I believe that if anybody else involved is going to dispute your decision, their argument will likely be driven by the very same kind of subjective "criteria". So, within the scope of the rule (NFHS 4-19-8b "A double technical foul is a situation in which two opponents commit technical fouls against each other at approximately the same time."), I think you're better off going with what's expected.

Just my $0.02

[jdw3018]

My criteria is somewhat similar to BITS', though I don't go with the 'same dead ball' period, as that can be quite a long time.

Anything that happens in the same 'incident' and before there has been a true break is a double in my books. I judge that 'break' as when the foul(s) are reported.

If another unsporting foul happens after I've reported a previous foul, even though it's in the same dead-ball period it is going to then be a false double or false multiple...