Foul by disqualified player

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I think it matters whether we assess a flagrant foul. Yes, you'll write a report; and the report will contain details of what happened.

If I were reading a report that mentioned a tackle and no official had assessed a flagrant foul, the inconsistency would disturb me: either the call was right and the report exaggerated the contact, or the report was right and somebody should have assessed a flagrant foul.

Don't you agree that we should call the fouls we see, not the fouls necessary to ensure the correct outcome?

Those were my thoughts. I would certainly question whether someone actually got tackled if a flagrant wasn't called if I were reading the game report.

[Texas Aggie]

Case 10.4.1e gives us leeway to hold the whistle if the other team is driving for a score.

That case play does not involve anyone coming off the bench nor does it involve actual contact. The conduct described in that case play does not affect the player driving to the basket. I don't think you can extrapolate that play to fit this example. You have to take the play as it comes. I'm not going to have a problem if the player with the ball is in the act of shooting counting the basket (if it goes in), the whole point of the play is that the player with the ball isn't allowed to "drive for a score" if a bench person tackles him!

Is there any good reason in the OP to go with two T's?

Yeah: its the rule! We can change the scenario and he can either 1) take the guy out without really leaving the bench (assuming the ball handler is near the sideline) or 2) come onto the court, try to take him out, and get juked (sp??)! Your rationale would lead us to believe we wouldn't have a T in either of these cases since we only had one in the original case.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

That case play does not involve anyone coming off the bench nor does it involve actual contact. The conduct described in that case play does not affect the player driving to the basket. I don't think you can extrapolate that play to fit this example. You have to take the play as it comes. I'm not going to have a problem if the player with the ball is in the act of shooting counting the basket (if it goes in), the whole point of the play is that the player with the ball isn't allowed to "drive for a score" if a bench person tackles him!

I agree with you, but since we don't know how this played out, I'm trying to determine what it looked like.

Someone else pointed out that it's most likely the 2nd half, which means A1 is either catching B in his backcourt, or A1 is running quite a ways before he tackles him.

The only way live ball/dead ball matters here is to decide whether or not to count the basket if it's shot. If you kill the ball as soon as A1 enters the court, you can't count the basket.

Now, if it happens in the backcourt (most likely given the scenario) it won't matter. If somehow A1 was DQd in the first half and this happens in the first half, it could be different.

If I see him enter the court there's no way I'm stopping a wide open layup for his opponent to call this T. I'm holding the whistle, because I think the intent of 10.4.1E applies. Otherwise, in an end-of-game situation, a defending bench member would need only enter the court to stop a potential fast break for the opponent; forcing free throws and a defended possession rather than a wide-open layup.

If the two events (entering the court and tackling) happen that close together, it's not an issue, because no one takes a fast break shot from that close to the bench.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

Yeah: its the rule!

I'll resubmit my earlier question, very s l o w l y... Name me any other situation where we impose multiple penalties for one act. Yes, there is a rule against entering the court illegally. There is a rule against tackling an opponent. But show me a rule that says we must give two T's.

I'll wait.

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

We can change the scenario and he can either 1) take the guy out without really leaving the bench (assuming the ball handler is near the sideline) or 2) come onto the court, try to take him out, and get juked (sp??)! Your rationale would lead us to believe we wouldn't have a T in either of these cases since we only had one in the original case.

What a creative interpretation. Of course you would have a T in each of those situations.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

Name me any other situation where we impose multiple penalties for one act.

How about any T that also gets charged indirectly to the head coach?

What do I win?