player control foul, or not?

[Marty Rogers]

A1 dribbles toward lane and goes airborne and is fouled by B1 as he releases the ball. A1 comes down on top of B2 who has established legal guarding position. Ball goes in the hoop. How do you call this? What foul shots are awarded?

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Marty Rogers
A1 dribbles toward lane and goes airborne and is fouled by B1 as he releases the ball. A1 comes down on top of B2 who has established legal guarding position. Ball goes in the hoop. How do you call this? What foul shots are awarded?

By rule this is a foul on B1 and a PC Foul on A1. This I believe is a false double foul and would be two shots for A1. The basket would not count for A if the ball went in, the ball would be dead. And this is a casebook interpretation on 4.19.6 Situation A.

Now I would hope that no one calls this. Consider the PC foul as a result of the actions by B1. This to me is like a multiple foul. You could prove that you know the rule by calling it, but it will be a call that will be remembered by. And not always being "remembered" is a good thing. By rule this would be the "proper" call.

Peace

[zebraman]

I'm w/ Rut on this one (hey, it happens). Count the hoop and one shot for A1. On the remote (and I mean remote) chance that a coach knows about a false double foul and said something about it, my interpretation is that B1 knocked A1 into B2.

Z

[mick]

Originally posted by zebraman
... my interpretation is that B1 knocked A1 into B2.

Yeah, I could see that from U.P. here.

[hawkk]

While I agree this should be called as a defensive foul the overwhelming majority of the time, I'd humbly submit that there are times when the false double foul should be called. Where the shooter is barrelling down and plows through a long stationary defender, and the foul is a touch foul on the hand, the greater offender is the shooter and, I believe, he should not be let off the hook -- but I would only go there where (1) the charge was blatant and obvious AND (2) the defensive foul was minor and obviously did not contribute to the charge (but could not be completely let go). I think if those two factors are met, you are not going to be remembered in a bad way.

[mick]

Originally posted by hawkk
Where the shooter is barrelling down and plows through a long stationary defender, and the foul is a touch foul on the hand, the greater offender is the shooter and, I believe, he should not be let off the hook --

I agree, hawk.
I rarely bail out an out-of-control ball handler.
A lot of the time such action can become an ugly no-call.
mick

[rockyroad]

Originally posted by hawkk
While I agree this should be called as a defensive foul the overwhelming majority of the time, I'd humbly submit that there are times when the false double foul should be called. Where the shooter is barrelling down and plows through a long stationary defender, and the foul is a touch foul on the hand, the greater offender is the shooter and, I believe, he should not be let off the hook -- but I would only go there where (1) the charge was blatant and obvious AND (2) the defensive foul was minor and obviously did not contribute to the charge (but could not be completely let go). I think if those two factors are met, you are not going to be remembered in a bad way.

I still don't think I would go down that false double street...in your situation, how about just calling the player control foul??? Everyone could see the ball handler was out of control and "barrelling" in, so just ring him up...

[Dan_ref]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by rockyroad

I still don't think I would go down that false double street...in your situation, how about just calling the player control foul??? Everyone could see the ball handler was out of control and "barrelling" in, so just ring him up...

I don't think the problem is when 1 guy calls 2 fouls, it's
when there's 2 whistles, the first on the defender
the second on the PC.

[rockyroad]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
it's when there's 2 whistles, the first on the defender
the second on the PC. [/B]

Yeah, but we all know that never happens, right!??!

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by rockyroad

Yeah, but we all know that never happens, right!??! [/B]

Well, never to me...lately...today anyway...

[Hawks Coach]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dan_ref

Originally posted by rockyroad

I don't think the problem is when 1 guy calls 2 fouls, it's
when there's 2 whistles, the first on the defender
the second on the PC.

In this case, can't you, upon discussion with your partner, determine that the PC was a result of the initial foul on B1 and award the FT to A1 without going the false double foul route?

I have always loved the fact that false fouls can be called anyway Only a rulebook writer could come up with something false that is also true. It depends upon what the definition of false is.

[Dan_ref]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Hawks Coach

Originally posted by Dan_ref

In this case, can't you, upon discussion with your partner, determine that the PC was a result of the initial foul on B1 and award the FT to A1 without going the false double foul route?

A1 drives the lane, goes up for a layup, arm contact by B1
TWEEEEEET!
A1 releases the ball, ball goes in, A1's contact with B2
leaves B2 a squishy blood stain on the court.
TWEEEEEET!

2 distinct whistles. Any coach worth his clipboard will
realize there were 2 distinct fouls. So, to answer your
question, we can & do discuss, it's just that you guys
pacing up & down the sideline make it tough for us to stick to our story!

I have always loved the fact that false fouls can be called anyway Only a rulebook writer could come up with something false that is also true. It depends upon what the definition of false is.

Sounds like you are drifting into a political discussion.
As a rule, I never discuss politics, just too controversial.
And I hate controversy.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

The reference is 4.19.8 (not 6) in the new 2002-03 NFHS casebook, page 29.

This is a difficult one. I would likely see the PC foul coming and be preparing to make that call against the shooter and wave off the shot. With this anticipation, the interim foul on the shooter would confuse me. I might not blow my whistle on the first foul. If I did, I likely wouldn't think to blow it again (it is probably already out of my mouth). During the interim, having blown my whistle somewhere in this mess, comparing severity of the two fouls, I would likely decide which one I'm going to report. I'm not sure I like my thought process.

If the shooter is out of control and the intial foul is slight, I'm not going to protect the shooter. If the initial foul is significant, I'm going to call the shooting foul and likely not protect the valid defender.

Sounds like some of you would do the same. But i'm not sure I like it.

Anyone care to guide my thinking? Pregame me! Words of wisdom Dan_ref?

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by DownTownTonyBrown
The reference is 4.19.8 (not 6) in the new 2002-03 NFHS casebook, page 29.

This is a difficult one. I would likely see the PC foul coming and be preparing to make that call against the shooter and wave off the shot. With this anticipation, the interim foul on the shooter would confuse me. I might not blow my whistle on the first foul. If I did, I likely wouldn't think to blow it again (it is probably already out of my mouth). During the interim, having blown my whistle somewhere in this mess, comparing severity of the two fouls, I would likely decide which one I'm going to report. I'm not sure I like my thought process.

If the shooter is out of control and the intial foul is slight, I'm not going to protect the shooter. If the initial foul is significant, I'm going to call the shooting foul and likely not protect the valid defender.

Sounds reasonable to me.

As far as preagaming it, all I would add is if you're the
only whistle and see 2 fouls decide which one you're going
with, like we agreed on already. Not much can be done
about double or even triple whistles on these in the paint
plays, the usual advice applies: don't give a prelim signal on the double whistle then get together & discuss to decide
on the foul.

[theteeto]

This is all a question of timing. It seems in the question that the shooter is fouled before the possible PC situation--TWEET, count the basket, shoot one. That's it. Once you call that first foul, the play is over, and no PC foul is possible. Unless, of course, you deem the impact after the foul to be intentional, i.e., a T. Now, if you rule that the shooter commits the PC foul at the same time B2 fouls him, that's a pretty standard double personal fouls, no shots, use the AP arrow, and, as a PC foul occured, you can't count the bucket...yes?