4th foul

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by fiasco

The only time I let it affect my game is when I do notice it, if there is an occasion where a certain player has already been whistled for 3 or more fouls, and he/she is involved in a play where there is a foul, but he/she and his/her teammate both fouled at the same time, I might be more inclined to assign the foul to the other teammate.

So, what do you do when that player who had 4 fouls hits the game-winning shot because you allowed them to stay in the game by assigning the foul to a different player?

[Clark Kent]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

So, what do you do when that player who had 4 fouls hits the game-winning shot because you allowed them to stay in the game by assigning the foul to a different player?

I give him a high-five, pat him on the butt and say "great shot!"

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

So, what do you do when that player who had 4 fouls hits the game-winning shot because you allowed them to stay in the game by assigning the foul to a different player?

I don't even think twice about it, because both players fouled equally, I just happened to assign it to the player with fewer fouls, so I'll sleep just fine at night.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by fiasco

I don't even think twice about it, because both players fouled equally, I just happened to assign it to the player with fewer fouls, so I'll sleep just fine at night.

If both players "fouled equally", as you say, then why aren't you enforcing a double foul? Tell me again how you "sleep fine at night" knowing you saw a foul committed by a player, and purposely chose to ignore it with the sole purpose of making sure they don't foul out?

I've seen this theory stated by a number of officials, but I have yet to see any rule, case, or philosophy in writing from the NFHS or NCAA backing this theory. If A1 has 4 fouls, and they commit a foul, they're done. The only real reason I can see for an official not calling the 5th foul is because they don't have the guts to go over and tell the coach that player has fouled out.

Yea, it's a little harsh. But tell me again what rule, case, interp or memo you are following with this theory?

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Yea, it's a little harsh. But tell me again what rule, case, interp or memo you are following with this theory?

Let's see, what do you guys call it around here....game management?

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

If both players "fouled equally", as you say, then why aren't you enforcing a double foul? Tell me again how you "sleep fine at night" knowing you saw a foul committed by a player, and purposely chose to ignore it with the sole purpose of making sure they don't foul out?

I'm assuming you meant multiple foul.

You can easily apply advantage/disadvantage here. If the fouls are equal (ie, two players hitting the arm of an offensive player attempting a shot), no more advantage has been gained than if only one player had hit the arm.

Now, if you have a defensive player hitting the arm while another defensive player is pushing in the back, then, yes, I would call a multiple foul.

Calling a multiple foul in the first scenario, especially when that foul causes a player to foul out, wouldn't fly with my commissioner. He'd mark be down for being over officious, even if I did use the excuse that some rules junkies on a message board really really wanted me to call a multiple foul.

[Clark Kent]

So back to how you sagacious officials surreptitiously go about obtaining the information on the number of fouls a player has? Do any of you have any bits of knowledge you've collected over the years on how to do so?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by fiasco

I'm assuming you meant multiple foul.

You can easily apply advantage/disadvantage here. If the fouls are equal (ie, two players hitting the arm of an offensive player attempting a shot), no more advantage has been gained than if only one player had hit the arm.

Now, if you have a defensive player hitting the arm while another defensive player is pushing in the back, then, yes, I would call a multiple foul.

Calling a multiple foul in the first scenario, especially when that foul causes a player to foul out, wouldn't fly with my commissioner. He'd mark be down for being over officious, even if I did use the excuse that some rules junkies on a message board really really wanted me to call a multiple foul.

That's all cool, and I don't have a problem with anything you've said in this post.

However, this brings us back to the real-world issue. B1 and B2 both foul A1 at approximately the same time. B1 has 4 fouls, B2 has 1. It looks like B2 fouled first, so you ignore B1's foul, since it wasn't intentional or flagrant, and report the foul on B2. No problem here. Where I have the problem is you appear to be saying you see B1 foul first, but you choose to give the foul to B2 just to keep B1 in the game. Is that correct?

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Where I have the problem is you appear to be saying you see B1 foul first, but you choose to give the foul to B2 just to keep B1 in the game. Is that correct?

? Where are you seeing this? If I said that it must have been a mis-type.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by fiasco

? Where are you seeing this? If I said that it must have been a mis-type.

From your post:

Originally Posted by fiasco

The only time I let it affect my game is when I do notice it, if there is an occasion where a certain player has already been whistled for 3 or more fouls, and he/she is involved in a play where there is a foul, but he/she and his/her teammate both fouled at the same time, I might be more inclined to assign the foul to the other teammate. But that rarely happens.

You only mentioned that the number of fouls each player had determined which player got assigned the foul. Why should that matter?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

If both players "fouled equally", as you say, then why aren't you enforcing a double foul? Tell me again how you "sleep fine at night" knowing you saw a foul committed by a player, and purposely chose to ignore it with the sole purpose of making sure they don't foul out?

I've seen this theory stated by a number of officials, but I have yet to see any rule, case, or philosophy in writing from the NFHS or NCAA backing this theory. If A1 has 4 fouls, and they commit a foul, they're done. The only real reason I can see for an official not calling the 5th foul is because they don't have the guts to go over and tell the coach that player has fouled out.

Yea, it's a little harsh. But tell me again what rule, case, interp or memo you are following with this theory?

Note that were not talking about ignoring a foul...but who to call it on when two players foul at about the same time. In the event of two players committing a foul at the same time and short of calling a multiple foul (which is NOT advised by anyone that I've ever heard), the official must decide which of the players to call a foul on. While you will not find a case play or rule telling you to not call it on the one with 4, you will also not find a rule or case supporting calling it on the one with 4 (vs. the other player) either. So, the official is basically left to make their own choice by whatever criteria they wish. Maybe you tag the guy that's been a jerk all game. Absent that, maybe you tag the one with fewer fouls (if you happen to know that). It doesn't really matter which one you tag with the foul by whatever criteria you deem valid. We have several times in a game where the play is 50/50 and you either call the foul or you don't call the foul. This is just another of those choices.

[JRutledge]

I think it is out job to know as much about the game as possible. For example I called two carry/palming calls last Friday and the coach tried to imply that I called more than anyone else. My response was to him, "We have called 5 (palming) calls in this first half, and I called the last two." I did not hear much of anything from him after that.

If you know it better prepares you for if and when you call that 5th foul you are prepare to handle it. Also I feel that you should not change what you do, but you should be aware. Because that 5th foul better be good or this might be one of the plays they send to the supervisor. I would like the foul to be there, but then again, kids foul out all the time and I was not aware of this. I guess it really depends on who the player is that has the 4th foul and what his coach thinks of that kid.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

.......that 5th foul better be good.......

I've heard/read this numerous times and the main problem I have is that it infers that it is less important that the first 4 be "good" whatever that means.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I've heard/read this numerous times and the main problem I have is that it infers that it is less important that the first 4 be "good" whatever that means.

That is the way you see it. Like it or not, all fouls are not treated the same and all times of the game are not treated the same. And what a coach will send to a supervisor is not going to be the same. And if something helps you focus and make sure you do not make a mistake, I am all for it.

Peace

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I've heard/read this numerous times and the main problem I have is that it infers that it is less important that the first 4 be "good" whatever that means.

Ummm, no. You inferred that. The statement, however, does not imply that.