this ALMOST happened...

[ABC Coach]

I reffed a game last Friday and had a potential tricky situation. I'll explain what COULD have happened and let you guys tell me how I should have handled it.

A1 goes to the hoop and while shooting gets bumped by B1. I called the blocking foul on B1 and the basket was good. Due to the minor bump, A1 falls to the ground, taking B2 down with him (incidental contact). I had already began reporting the foul to the scorer's table and didn't see what happened next. B2 claims that A1 punched him in the stomach when they went to the ground. A1 says he was just trying to lift B2 off of him. By the time I had turned around, both players were being held back by their teammates and nothing ensued.

Because I didn't see what happened (and unfortunately my partner [a rookie ref] wasn't watching it either), I didn't call any technicals because I didn't know exactly what had transpired. Maybe I should have called the technicals just because A1 and B2 were arguing...so feel free to correct me on that point if I need it.

Now...let's say I did call the double technical. I have A1 entitled to a free throw, and A1 and B2 have technicals. If I understand things correctly, I have to administer the penalities in the order in which they occured, therefore the two technicals WOULD NOT have cancelled one another in this situation. How should I have proceeded if I would have called the T's?

Thanks for the help.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by ABC Coach

Let's say I did call the double technical.

Double foul. No shots. Point of interuption.

[mbyron]

1. Watch the players until action is settled.
2. Call T's as needed.
3. Not sure about FIBA, but a double T is usually POI.

[APG]

Under all major codes in the USA, you would issue a double technical foul. You would NOT shoot free throw for the technical fouls. Double fouls go to the point of interruption, which in this cause would the free throws on the shooting foul.

I think this is the pertinent rules for FIBA

Art. 42 Special situations

42.1 Definition
In the same stopped-clock period which follows an infraction, special situations may arise when additional foul(s) are committed.

42.2 Procedure

42.2.1 All fouls shall be charged and all penalties identified.
42.2.2 The order in which all fouls occurred shall be determined.
42.2.3 All equal penalties against the teams and all double foul penalties shall be cancelled in the order in which they were called. Once the penalties have been cancelled they are considered as never having occurred.
42.2.4 The right to possession of the ball as part of the last penalty still to be administered shall cancel any prior rights to possession of the ball.

[ABC Coach]

Okay...don't laugh...I'm not familiar with the "point of interruption" (POI) that has been mentioned. Can someone break that down for me?

In my hypothetical situation proposed in the OP, I'm assuming that the correct conclusion would be:

A1 and B2 get charged with T's and then we continue the game with A1 shooting his free throw. Is that right?

The "special situations" article in the FIBA rules always leaves me scratching my head. For me personally, I find it difficult to apply that article without a specific situation to apply it to. I think this thread might help me get all that straightened out. Thanks for the replies thus far.

[tref]

Originally Posted by ABC Coach

Due to the minor bump, A1 falls to the ground, taking B2 down with him (incidental contact). I had already began reporting the foul to the scorer's table and didn't see what happened next. B2 claims that A1 punched him in the stomach when they went to the ground.

I think the teaching point here is, when we have a call & players go to the floor... stay with the players before going to the table.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by ABC Coach

Okay...don't laugh...I'm not familiar with the "point of interruption" (POI) that has been mentioned. Can someone break that down for me?

In my hypothetical situation proposed in the OP, I'm assuming that the correct conclusion would be:

A1 and B2 get charged with T's and then we continue the game with A1 shooting his free throw. Is that right?

The "special situations" article in the FIBA rules always leaves me scratching my head. For me personally, I find it difficult to apply that article without a specific situation to apply it to. I think this thread might help me get all that straightened out. Thanks for the replies thus far.

That's the correct conclusion for FED and NCAA.

It *seems* to also be correct for FIBA, based on the wording you provided.

[ABC Coach]

Originally Posted by tref

I think the teaching point here is, when we have a call & players go to the floor... stay with the players before going to the table.

Lesson learned...I'll even include that in the next ref clinic we do over here.

[bradfordwilkins]

Originally Posted by tref

I think the teaching point here is, when we have a call & players go to the floor... stay with the players before going to the table.

Agreeeed - especially in two-man.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by ABC Coach

Okay...don't laugh...I'm not familiar with the "point of interruption" (POI) that has been mentioned. Can someone break that down for me?

"Point of interruption" is another way of saying "pick up where we left off." It's a method to resume play after a double foul, inadvertant whistle, or interrupted game (something you already know about). In the simplest terms, the team that was in control of the ball at the time of the whistle, keeps control.

Here's one example from five years ago to describe it, ABC:

After A1 scored a basket, and B2 inbounded the ball to B3, A4 and B4 shoved each other up the court. I called a double foul.

Back then, a double foul resulted in no free throws, and the possession arrow determined who got the ball. On this day, Team A, who just scored, got the ball back, because the arrow said so.

Today, a double foul results in no free throws, and point of interruption. Had this rule been in place back then, Team B would have kept the ball, because they already had it at the whistle. (I think this is one of the best recent rule changes.)

One time that you would still go to the arrow at the point of interruption is when there is no team control during a live ball, such as during a rebound.

I hope this helps.

[ABC Coach]

Thanks for the POI explanation. Let me see if I got this straight. Fouls that have equal penalities should cancel one another, right? So, using my OP as an example...

A1 was fouled while making a shot. He's entitled to a free throw. Then A1 and B2 get heated and two T's are called. Since technical fouls carry with them a different penalty than the PF, the PF stands and the technicals cancel each other. Is my reasoning right thus far?

Now let's just say for argument's sake that A1 made the shot and got fouled, but I called B1's foul as unsportsmanlike. This foul carries with it the same penalty as a technical. Therefore, by calling a double technical for the extra activity that followed would have resulted in B1's unsportsmanlike being cancelled by A1's technical...leaving only the B2 technical to be enforced. The end result would have been that we ignore the extra free throw for A1 when he made the shot and got fouled, and a player from team A would be shooting the technical free throws and retaining possession. Am I understanding all this clearly now?

Sorry...good grief...as I reread what I've written, I know it's a jumbled mess. After I get this sorted out in my head, I'll try my best to avoid such rambling!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Today, a double foul results in no free throws, and point of interruption. Had this rule been in place back then, Team B would have kept the ball, because they already had it at the whistle. (I think this is one of the best recent rule changes.)

One time that you would still go to the arrow at the point of interruption is when there is no team control during a live ball, such as during a rebound.

Forgive me, but I'm going to clarify a bit more.

This part is irrelevant, in that it's not necessary.

As soon as the basket went in, B was entitled to the ball. Had you called a DF prior to the ball being inbounded, B would still get the ball. Team control is only one factor to consider before going to the arrow.

This part is not necessarily true either. There are times, during a live ball, where a lack of team control at the time of the whiste would not send you to the arrow.

Throw-ins are prime examples.

[bainsey]

I'm going to defer to someone who knows the FIBA rules, because I can only answer your question based on NFHS here in the U.S., and the approach is quite different. Our approach has more to do with the order that fouls and double fouls happen, as opposed to the weight they carry.

The way I see it, in one case, you have a common foul, followed by a double technical foul. In another case, you have an intentional foul (that's the best NFHS equivalent I see), followed by a double technical. Either way, the double T goes to "point of interruption." Both players would get technical fouls, which would count as team fouls, and we'd pick up where we left off...
*for the common foul during a made shot: one free throw.
*for the intentional foul: two free throws (lane spaces empty), and throw-in at the nearest spot of the foul.

[Jay R]

Originally Posted by ABC Coach

Now let's just say for argument's sake that A1 made the shot and got fouled, but I called B1's foul as unsportsmanlike. This foul carries with it the same penalty as a technical. Therefore, by calling a double technical for the extra activity that followed would have resulted in B1's unsportsmanlike being cancelled by A1's technical...leaving only the B2 technical to be enforced. The end result would have been that we ignore the extra free throw for A1 when he made the shot and got fouled, and a player from team A would be shooting the technical free throws and retaining possession. Am I understanding all this clearly now?

Almost. Keep in mind that in FIBA rules, an unsportsmanlike foul on a successful field goal is one free throw plus possession at half court. So it would not cancel the first technical.

[eg-italy]

Originally Posted by ABC Coach

I reffed a game last Friday and had a potential tricky situation. I'll explain what COULD have happened and let you guys tell me how I should have handled it.

A1 goes to the hoop and while shooting gets bumped by B1. I called the blocking foul on B1 and the basket was good. Due to the minor bump, A1 falls to the ground, taking B2 down with him (incidental contact). I had already began reporting the foul to the scorer's table and didn't see what happened next. B2 claims that A1 punched him in the stomach when they went to the ground. A1 says he was just trying to lift B2 off of him. By the time I had turned around, both players were being held back by their teammates and nothing ensued.

Because I didn't see what happened (and unfortunately my partner [a rookie ref] wasn't watching it either), I didn't call any technicals because I didn't know exactly what had transpired. Maybe I should have called the technicals just because A1 and B2 were arguing...so feel free to correct me on that point if I need it.

Now...let's say I did call the double technical. I have A1 entitled to a free throw, and A1 and B2 have technicals. If I understand things correctly, I have to administer the penalities in the order in which they occured, therefore the two technicals WOULD NOT have cancelled one another in this situation. How should I have proceeded if I would have called the T's?

Thanks for the help.

A punch in the stomach by a player to a player is never a technical foul in FIBA; it would be if a substitute or an excluded player was involved, which is not the case. It's either an unsportsmanlike or disqualifying personal foul, most probably a D.

Assuming you called a U on A1 and a T on B1, the order of occurrence is immaterial: the two penalties are equal, so they cancel each other. The FT for A1 because of B1's shooting foul remains and play resumes as usual after that FT.

Why wouldn't they cancel out? They are fouls committed during the same dead ball period, so the article on special situation applies. Do you remember? A pencil and a sheet of paper

Shooting foul on B1 (1 FT)

U on A1 (2FT + ball)

T on B1 (2FT + ball)

The two equal penalties cancel out. It would be different if the first foul on B1 had been a U (without A1 scoring); now the remaining penalty would be the one for the T on B1, so 2 FT for any player of team A.

Ciao