Rules citation, please...

[bainsey]

"Following a goal by A–1, A–2 purposely grabs the ball and inbounds it to A–3. Play continues until B–1 is called for a common foul. The mistake is now recognized.

"Official charges team A with a technical foul, cancels the common foul and puts the consumed time back on the clock. Is the official correct?"

RefSchool says YES, but I'm not finding a citation. A little help?

[PG_Ref]

See case play 10.1.8

[justacoach]

Originally Posted by bainsey

"Following a goal by A–1, A–2 purposely grabs the ball and inbounds it to A–3. Play continues until B–1 is called for a common foul. The mistake is now recognized.

"Official charges team A with a technical foul, cancels the common foul and puts the consumed time back on the clock. Is the official correct?"

RefSchool says YES, but I'm not finding a citation. A little help?

This case is farcical on so many different levels...
I'm surprised points were not awarded somewhere and that play was restarted with the resumption of play procedure at the POI after assessing a DOG warning against both teams and an indirect T on B's mascot!

Are you paying money for this purportedly educational endeavor?

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by justacoach

Are you paying money for this purportedly educational endeavor?

LOL It's $25 for the first year, $5 for each additional. You get a gem like these every so often, but overall, you get your money's worth and then some.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by bainsey

LOL It's $25 for the first year, $5 for each additional. You get a gem like these every so often, but overall, you get your money's worth and then some.

You'd be better off keeping the money, based on what has been posted.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

You'd be better off keeping the money, based on what has been posted.

Nah. It's not like I'm going to post the great majority of the stuff they got right. Sometimes, though, it references rules, when it should be referencing cases, like PG pointed out.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by justacoach

This case is farcical on so many different levels...

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

You'd be better off keeping the money, based on what has been posted.

Why? The question essentially quotes an NFHS casebook play. Why is it farcical or a waste of money to test knowledge of the casebook?