Worst game of the year last night

[Jurassic Referee]

Fouling a thrower is an intentional personal foul, not a technical foul. NFHS 9-2PENALTIES4.

It is a "T" for a defender to touch the ball only while it is in the thrower's hands, but that "T" is charged to the player-not the team. NFHS rule 9-2PENALTIES3.

Other than that, once you found out that your partner was not open to being helped, it's a GIGO situation. You can only help those that want help.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Fouling a thrower is an intentional personal foul, not a technical foul. NFHS 9-2PENALTIES4.

In this case, it's a technical due to the previously issued DOG warning.

[Mark Padgett]

Snaq brings up an interesting point. Say team A already has one DOG warning. On a spot throw in for team B, A1 reaches over and fouls B1 who has the ball to inbound. Is it an intentional foul plus a technical for the second DOG warning, or just one or the other?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Snaq brings up an interesting point. Say team A already has one DOG warning. On a spot throw in for team B, A1 reaches over and fouls B1 who has the ball to inbound. Is it an intentional foul plus a technical for the second DOG warning, or just one or the other?

Just the former

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Just the former

Thanks. If there had been no previous DOG warning, would the intentional count as the first, similar to if the defender hit the ball for a technical that counts as the first (if no previous)?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Thanks. If there had been no previous DOG warning, would the intentional count as the first, similar to if the defender hit the ball for a technical that counts as the first (if no previous)?

Yes.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

In this case, it's a technical due to the previously issued DOG warning.

Nope, still an intentional personal foul. See case book play 10.3.10SitA(a)+ COMMENT.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Nope, still an intentional personal foul. See case book play 10.3.10SitA(a)+ COMMENT.

Interesting, the case says nothing about whether a warning had been issued. I must have misremembered this one.

[A Pennsylvania Coach]

I'm guessing this line is causing some confusion:

V42 almost hugs the thrower, with both arms two feet over the line.

I didn't judge V42 to have contacted the thrower. When I say "almost hugs" I'm trying to describe the position some young, new players take when trying to guard someone, with both arms out on either side of the player they are defending.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by A Pennsylvania Coach

I didn't judge V42 to have contacted the thrower. When I say "almost hugs" I'm trying to describe the position some young, new players take when trying to guard someone, with both arms out on either side of the player they are defending.

Yup, the "almost hugs with both arms" implied physical contact to me. No contact = team "T" as per 10-1-5(c)...which was your (correct) call.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Yup, the "almost hugs with both arms" implied physical contact to me. No contact = team "T" as per 10-1-5(c)...which was your (correct) call.

Wait....wasn't this the first throw-in plane violation? Did I miss the first one in the OP?