I don't have my books anywhere near me.....but is it specified that a personal foul has to be committed by a player on the opposing team, or just an opponent? This could come into play in this situation.

Once again forgive me for not having my books at my disposal. :)

Are you thinking along the lines of A6 isn't a "player" but instead s/he's "bench personnel?" I suppose that would have to effect how you'd distribute the fouls. :confused:

It would have a big effect on whether you can call a foul and award three shots. I do not think you can, I think you can only penalize the action of coming on the court period, 2 shots ball, and reams of paperwork afterward.

4-19-1

"A personal foul is a <b>player</b> foul which involves illegal contact with an opponent while the ball is live..."

4-19-2

"A common foul is a personal foul which is neither flagrant nor intentional nor committed against a player trying or tapping for a field goal nor a part of a double or multiple foul."

So, what does this tell us??????

Like Brian said, it tells us there's a loophole in the rules. :D

Interesting question, bard and Brian.

Ignoring the probable resolution of a forfeit...

T for bench personnel entering the floor illegally. We all agree there.

Since the shooter was in the act, the ball remains live. Until the try ends, the ball is live.

Now, while you've clearly noted that a personal foul must be commited by a <b>player</b>, does that illegal sub/bench personnel become a player? Since an illegal "substitute becomes a player when the ball becomes live" implies that the ball is dead when the infraction actually occurs, it doesn't directly apply. It could perhaps be extended (through use of 2-3) to say that the sub becomes a player when the ball is already live. Thus, the illegal entrant could "become" a player capable of commiting a personal foul. However, someone must become a non-player at the same time. Not sure how to choose who...but would it matter.

The 6 player T actually calls them "6 squad memebers" implying that the 6th is not a player. This illegal entrant generally stays bench personnel.

That said, it is a T for a non-player to commit a foul. This fits the definition of an intentional foul. I think we could still call an intentional T for the contact. We could, by rule, come up with 2 T's. One for bench personnel entering in the court. Another for a non-player commiting an intentional foul ("personal or technical foul designed to stop or keep the clock from starting, to neutralize an opponent's obvious advantageous position")

In the end, I would either forfeit or invoke 2-3 since this scenario is not clearly/completely covered. No way I would let the team that violated come out of this situation with anything more than a tie. The only ways to do that is forfeit or ensure that enough FTs are taken to make 3.

I think you still have two seperate acts to deal with here
1. is the T for illegal entry
2. Flagrant T for unsporting actions (non player intentional contact with player during live ball)

eject A6, have B shoot 4 FT (coach picks the shooter(s))
and if there is time left give the ball to B at the appropriate location (NF or NCAA)

After game report incident to state or conference commissioner.

If you really want to pile it on:(just playing)

1. is the T for illegal entry
2. Flagrant T for unsporting actions (non player intentional contact with player during live ball)
3. T for having more than 5 on the court.
4. Flagrant T on assistant Coach (NF only, so you can send the kid to the locker room with an adult.)
5. after you report all these T's, T up the head coach when he goes ballistic.

Have B shoot 10 FT's
Give the ball to B at appropriate location with 4.2
left on the clock(last time I had definite knowledge
before incident).

I am still confused on why anyone would even consider a forfeit?

If you have a fight, and someone comes off the bench are you going to call the game? This would be a stoopid act (Pun intended), but not worthy of calling a game. Who has the rule book. Isn't a forfiet only allowed when:

- Team does not show up
- Team refuses to obey the ref (i.e. coach takes team off the floor, refuses to come back)
- Game Management refuses to obey ref (i.e. won't eject fan in Uecker section because he is yeling at us).
- Team has fewer than 5 players and can no longer compete.


Where would this come in? I certainly don't think you could declare this such a travesty that would prevent the game from continuing and just end it.

I guess I can see why it would be considered, but as I mentioned earlier in the thread, I don't think it's a particularly compelling idea either. . .

I would rather find a way to penalize the kid and give the offended team a fair and reasonable chance to win the game. But I don't like just giving it to them, b/c one kid was out of control.

And this should probably also be its own thread, but: Doesn't football have a rule that if a player comes off the bench to stop what would clearly have been a touchdown, then the officials can award a touchdown? I'm sure I've seen a highlight of this happening, but can't remember what the result of the play was.

Chuck

<i>And this should probably also be its own thread, but: Doesn't football have a rule that if a player comes off the bench to stop what would clearly have been a touchdown, then the officials can award a touchdown? I'm sure I've seen a highlight of this happening, but can't remember what the result of the play was.</i>

You are correct. If the offensive player had a clear shot to the endzone, he still gets the TD.

unusual situation
 

My opinion only. First we have a tech for coming on the floor. The play is now dead, but the shot counts if it goes. Second, B1 is still in the act of shooting, but the second foul happens after the whistle has stopped play. This has to be a flagrant tech. A6 is gone, two shots for the first foul, three shots for the second foul, because A1 is in the act of shooting a three, and team B gets the ball at the half court line away from the table.

Re: unusual situation
 

Todd -

As stated in my earlier post, I agree with your ruling, but I believe that A would get the ball back, even by NCAA rules, because of the flagrant T. Any thoughts?

Jacob Tingle

p.s. i hope the rest of your summer went well!

I got my A's and B's mixed up. The offended team gets the ball back. The summer went well. I did not get fired from any junior high conferences! hope you had as good, or better luck. Let's get another assignment together next year.

I guess I'll weigh in on this one,seeing my partners laughed at me when I told them to handle it:
1)Use R3-2,'cause it isn't specifically covered.
2)plain ol' technical foul on A for coming on the floor.Coming onto the floor,by itself,is not a flagrant act(think coach or bench-player taking a few steps onto the court).
3)Withold whistle and ball is still alive,similar to the case where you withold whistle for technical on B while A is on a breakaway.
4)Flagrant technical foul for A contacting the shooter.This is where R3-2 comes in.
5)Charge A with both technical fouls,count them both against the bonus,and eject A.
6)Shoot 2 FT's for first A technical(shots taken in order of fouls occuring).Anyone shoots.
7)Shoot 3 FT's for flagrant technical,using rationale under R3-2 that this is what B1 would have got for a normal foul.B1 would shoot these FT's,rather than any B player,using the same rationale.
8)B gets possession at center,with whatever time is on the clock when A committed the second technical foul.
9)No thought of a forfeit,unless B1 was injured on the play.Write it up real good and let the league worry about it.

"That's my story and I'm sticking to it!"-Alex Hawkins,OLD Baltimore Colt.

The rule book is pretty specific that a T is 2 shots. You would give 3 under the elasticity rule?