The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Double violation... but not on a free throw shot (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/55680-double-violation-but-not-free-throw-shot.html)

bradfordwilkins Sat Dec 05, 2009 04:48pm

Double violation... but not on a free throw shot
 
Had a fun one today -- Coming down the floor and A1 and B1 are josstling at each other a little and A1 is trying to get open and runs out of bounds (a good 3 feet outside the sideline) and is simultaneously followed by B1 who goes out a step behind him.

We're talking both of them running down outside the sideline by 3 feet. I whistle the violation and brain goes into overdrive and I decide the only other Double "violation" I know of is a free throw and in that case we have a jump ball...so I went to the arrow, no complaints around.

But was I correct? And are there any other "double violations" ?

Nevadaref Sat Dec 05, 2009 04:55pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by bradfordwilkins (Post 639940)
Had a fun one today -- Coming down the floor and A1 and B1 are josstling at each other a little and A1 is trying to get open and runs out of bounds (a good 3 feet outside the sideline) and is simultaneously followed by B1 who goes out a step behind him.

We're talking both of them running down outside the sideline by 3 feet. I whistle the violation and brain goes into overdrive and I decide the only other Double "violation" I know of is a free throw and in that case we have a jump ball...so I went to the arrow, no complaints around.

But was I correct? And are there any other "double violations" ?

I don't believe that your situation is explicitly covered by the rules. Your solution has as much merit as any, but I would be tempted to resume at the POI. 2-3 seems to have to come into play here.

jdw3018 Sat Dec 05, 2009 04:57pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 639942)
I don't believe that your situation is explicitly covered by the rules. Your solution has as much merit as any, but I would be tempted to resume at the POI. 2-3 seems to have to come into play here.

Or, call the violation on A1 as he went out of bounds followed by B1.

That said, in the case of a true simultaneous violation, I'd go w/ POI.

Nevadaref Sat Dec 05, 2009 05:03pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdw3018 (Post 639943)
Or, call the violation on A1 as he went out of bounds followed by B1.

That said, in the case of a true simultaneous violation, I'd go w/ POI.

Of course, it would be better to decide that one violation preceded the other, but I took the words of the poster that the violations happened simultaneous at face value and tried to answer for a theoretical situation, not a practical one.

bas2456 Sat Dec 05, 2009 05:14pm

If you're going to go POI, why whistle the play dead at all? WOuldn't it make more sense to call it on A, since he went out first, if you're going to call it at all?

Nevadaref Sat Dec 05, 2009 05:39pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by bas2456 (Post 639949)
If you're going to go POI, why whistle the play dead at all? WOuldn't it make more sense to call it on A, since he went out first, if you're going to call it at all?

Thought of that too, but again, practical versus theoretical...:)

BillyMac Sat Dec 05, 2009 07:15pm

Apologies To The Blues Brothers ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 639952)
Thought of that too, but again, practical versus theoretical.

Elwood: What kind of advice do you usually have here?
Claire: Oh, we got both kinds. We got practical and theoretical.

Back In The Saddle Sat Dec 05, 2009 10:46pm

Not sure why folks are suggesting POI on this? We have at least one example of a simultaneous violation and its remedy, it goes to the AP. POI, OTOH, has a specified list of times to use it, and this isn't one of them. You could obviously go either way by invoking 2-3, but I'd argue you'll be more correct to go with the established precedent for simultaneous violations.

bradfordwilkins Sat Dec 05, 2009 10:58pm

Honestly it was as simultaneous... saw the whole thing take place right in front of me. And blatant enough (not just a foot off the court) that we had a clear violation. So go with that when offering thoughts.

Adam Sun Dec 06, 2009 09:21am

Isn't the double violation on a free throw POI? If you have another shot, you go to that. If not, you go to the arrow (which is POI in this case).

Assume double violation on a Tech free throw, you going to the arrow?

jdw3018 Sun Dec 06, 2009 09:29am

Quote:

Originally Posted by bradfordwilkins (Post 639992)
Honestly it was as simultaneous... saw the whole thing take place right in front of me. And blatant enough (not just a foot off the court) that we had a clear violation. So go with that when offering thoughts.

Both players left the court at exactly the same time? I don't care that they both ended up running out of bounds, but which one left the court before the other? That's the player who violated first.

Adam Sun Dec 06, 2009 09:31am

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdw3018 (Post 640034)
Both players left the court at exactly the same time? I don't care that they both ended up running out of bounds, but which one left the court before the other? That's the player who violated first.

It's possible that the defense reacted quickly enough that he stepped out of bounds at virtually the same time; making a simultaneous violation the only valid call (or a no-call).

jdw3018 Sun Dec 06, 2009 09:34am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 640035)
It's possible that the defense reacted quickly enough that he stepped out of bounds at virtually the same time; making a simultaneous violation the only valid call (or a no-call).

As a practical matter (not a theoretical one) in a game, if I'm calling this violation, I'm determining which one of them committed the violation first. Period.

bob jenkins Sun Dec 06, 2009 09:39am

Quote:

Originally Posted by bradfordwilkins (Post 639940)
Had a fun one today -- Coming down the floor and A1 and B1 are josstling at each other a little and A1 is trying to get open and runs out of bounds (a good 3 feet outside the sideline) and is simultaneously followed by B1 who goes out a step behind him.

Impossible by rule (or case). You must decide which happened first.

jdw3018 Sun Dec 06, 2009 09:46am

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 640038)
Impossible by rule (or case). You must decide which happened first.

I agree with Bob.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:34pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1