Administering a false multiple

[bob jenkins]

Bonus FTs are only shot for common fouls. I think you are decribing a "simultaneous" foul (that's one example of a false multiple foul), and that's not a common foul.

So, A gets the ball back.

(IOW, the fouls are "tied" for 6th. The next foul will be the 8th.)

Note also that the definition section does not describe a "simultaneous" foul, only a "simultaneous foul by opponents." An important disctinction.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Bonus FTs are only shot for common fouls. I think you are decribing a "simultaneous" foul (that's one example of a false multiple foul), and that's not a common foul.

The fouls are simultaneous, agreed. This is a false multiple foul, agreed. So a common foul can be part of a false multiple foul, but not part of a simultaneous foul; and there's nothing in the rules that says a simultaneous foul must include fouls by both teams. Hmmmm.

So the penalty for the rebounding foul is simply possession of the ball after A1 shoots his/her free throw(s) with the lane spaces unoccupied?

[Indianaref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Last free throw goes in: Run the endliine.
Last free throw misses: Designated spot.

I had almost the same exact play in one of my games last week. I wonder if Connecticut is the neighboring state?

I read the OP wrong. False multiple foul. I still like shooting the one and one for A2. If you go Bob's way with a throw in, don't have books with me, but I am sure you are not allowed to run the endline under your own basket.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Indianaref

I read the OP wrong. False multiple foul. I still like shooting the one and one for A2. If you go Bob's way with a throw in, don't have books with me, but I am sure you are not allowed to run the endline under your own basket.

Isn't Team A is retaining possession?

[Indianaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Isn't Team A is retaining possession?

Yes. Team A retains possession with a throw in. I think Billy was asking if they could run the endline if A1 makes his last free throw for the shooting foul. Is that right?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Indianaref

Yes. Team A retains possession with a throw in. I think Billy was asking if they could run the endline if A1 makes his last free throw for the shooting foul. Is that right?

A can never run the end-line (legally) in the play described.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

A can never run the end-line (legally) in the play described.

Sorry. I was thinking false double, not false mutiple.

[Indianaref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

A can never run the end-line (legally) in the play described.

Correct, I just don't have the book handy to quote a rule number.

[letemplay]

Had similar play last night except basket by A1 was good. Gave one shot to A1 and 1+1 to A2. Can't use a/p after this, what if it was in B's direction? Wouldn't make sense for B to have ball after committing a foul. (maybe that's the part you misread in o/p)

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Bonus FTs are only shot for common fouls. I think you are decribing a "simultaneous" foul (that's one example of a false multiple foul), and that's not a common foul.

So, A gets the ball back.

(IOW, the fouls are "tied" for 6th. The next foul will be the 8th.)

Note also that the definition section does not describe a "simultaneous" foul, only a "simultaneous foul by opponents." An important disctinction.

This sounds right to me.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Bonus FTs are only shot for common fouls. I think you are decribing a "simultaneous" foul (that's one example of a false multiple foul), and that's not a common foul.

So, A gets the ball back.

(IOW, the fouls are "tied" for 6th. The next foul will be the 8th.)

Note also that the definition section does not describe a "simultaneous" foul, only a "simultaneous foul by opponents." An important disctinction.

Can you justify that by rule though?

The play described meets the definition of a false multiple foul as per 4-19-12. It doesn't meet the rules definition of either a simultaneous foul or a multiple foul. And rule 10: PENALTIES: (Rule 10 Summary) #5 on a false multiple foul states that each foul carries it's own penalty. Shouldn't we be trying to penalize both of these fouls by using those rules? You're not really penalizing the foul on the shooter if you ignore that foul. You're assessing one penalty for two fouls.

I can't see any rules justification for having a tie and going to the POI. There is no mention in 4-36-1 of a false multiple foul being applicable.

And yes, I realize that there is a gray area in the rules of which foul to penalize first. But I think the officials have to get together and make that decision.

Thoughts?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Can you justify that by rule though?

Yes.

There's no definition of "simultaneous foul." So, we have to use the common definition of "happening at the same time."

If fouls happen at the same time, then they aren't common fouls, and no bonus is shot.

The play described meets the definition of a false multiple foul as per 4-19-12.

Agreed.

It doesn't meet the rules definition of either a simultaneous foul or a multiple foul.

The first isn't defined, and I agree it doesn't meet the definition of the second.

And rule 10: PENALTIES: (Rule 10 Summary) #5 on a false multiple foul states that each foul carries it's own penalty. Shouldn't we be trying to penalize both of these fouls by using those rules?

Yes. Shoot two for the shooting foul. Ball inbounds for the non-shooting foul.

I can't see any rules justification for having a tie and going to the POI.

Nor can I. That's why I didn't advocate going to POI.

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The first isn't defined, and I agree it doesn't meet the definition of the second.

I'm not following that a Simultaneous Foul is not defined. 4-19-10. And it definitely is not this OP.

I agree that it is a False Multiple Foul. If each foul carries it's own penalty, then we should penalize them independently as if the other one did not happen. In the OP, I think that would be A1 shoots the FTs for B1's foul (lane cleared) and spot throw in for team A for B2's foul.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

I'm not following that a Simultaneous Foul is not defined. 4-19-10. And it definitely is not this OP.

4-19-10 "A simultaneous foul (personal or technical) by opponents is a situation ..."

Note that this is NOT the same as

"A simultaneous foul is a situation in which opponents ..."

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

1)There's no definition of "simultaneous foul." So, we have to use the common definition of "happening at the same time."

2) If fouls happen at the same time, then they aren't common fouls, and no bonus is shot.

3)Yes. Shoot two for the shooting foul. Ball inbounds for the non-shooting foul.

1) But there is a definition of a false multiple foul and this play meets that definition imo. It sureasheck doesn't meet the definition of a double foul or simultaneous foul. Why would we penalize it the same as those?

2) Rules reference? That's not what the penalty for a false multiple foul states. that rule states that each foul carries it's own penalty.

3) Aren't you just basically picking the shooting foul as occurring first then and penalizing it that way?

As I said, I can't really see any other way using the definitions and penalties that we have but to decide which foul came first and then administer the appropriate penalties that way.