Get it right? Double foul while shot in the air.

[NoFussRef]

A1 releases shot, A2 illegal screen -vs- B1 push foul on A2.

Shot sinks, we count bucket, report double foul (A2 and B1), and then went to AP for inbound. (NFHS)

Second guessing the AP, POI?

[APG]

Incorrect.

For all double fouls we resume with the point of interruption. Sometimes the POI happens to be the AP. In this case, the POI will be an undesignated throw-in for Team B.

[NoFussRef]

I knew something was bugging me about this one. No doubt about the double call, one of the easiest I've had to make. But something was nagging me.

POI (A1's bucket was good) B gets ball for throw in and can run endline.

Worked this game with a 3rd year Association ref (I am not). We conferenced to make sure we agreed shot had been released before double foul call. He seemed a lil unsure what to do, so I asked if he felt AP was correct and he agreed.

I will be sure to get with him and his book, find the rule and any case that applies so we can both get it right next time.

[APG]

For some reason, some officials think of the AP and POI as two separate things. Some don't realize that the AP is simply one of the ways we resume with the POI.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

For some reason, some officials think of the AP and POI as two separate things. Some don't realize that the AP is simply one of the ways we resume with the POI.

For old timers like me, it's because we used to go to the arrow, or toss a jump ball, for double fouls. The point of interruption has only been around for a few years.

[jeffpea]

glad to hear that you talked w/ your partner about whether the shot was released prior to the double foul...

in my experience, the shot is almost always (99.5%) released AFTER the screen has taken place...the typical timeline is: screen, catch, shot...although it may happen, it is very unusual to have catch, shot, screen...

[NoFussRef]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

For old timers like me, it's because we used to go to the arrow, or toss a jump ball, for double fouls. The point of interruption has only been around for a few years.

I think this is where I got the idea to go to the arrow. I've learned from working with "vets" every chance I get. Having not yet joined OSAA nor have I owned a copy of NFHS book since late 1990s, I have picked up rules and how to handle odd-sitchs through experience on the court.

Like to add that finding this forum has been a wealth of information and appreciate the way (most posters) seem to share my genuine love of the game and enthusiasm to always improve while helping less experienced grow.

(Plan to join Association before next season.)

[rwest]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

For some reason, some officials think of the AP and POI as two separate things. Some don't realize that the AP is simply one of the ways we resume with the POI.

The term point of interruption means to resume play where the play was interrupted. Was the play interrupted duirng an AP Throw-in? No. It was interrupted during a shot attempt. The AP is just one way we make a dead ball live. It is the way we put a ball in play when there is no other way to do so. It is not the point of interruption. In this case we don't use the AP because the shot was good. If the shot had missed we go with the AP because we have no idea who would have got the rebound, not because the AP was the point of interruption. The POI was the shot attempt. What happens after determines how we put the ball in play. If the AP was the POI it wouldn't matter what happened with the shot. We would have gone with the AP Throw-in. But it does matter and that's why we have two different ways of putting the ball in play.

It is when the point of interruption can not be determined that we go with the AP. They are mutually exclusive.

[APG]

Originally Posted by rwest

The term point of interruption means to resume play where the play was interrupted. Was the play interrupted duirng an AP Throw-in? No. It was interrupted during a shot attempt. The AP is just one way we make a dead ball live. It is the way we put a ball in play when there is no other way to do so. It is not the point of interruption. In this case we don't use the AP because the shot was good. If the shot had missed we go with the AP because we have no idea who would have got the rebound, not because the AP was the point of interruption. The POI was the shot attempt. What happens after determines how we put the ball in play. If the AP was the POI it wouldn't matter what happened with the shot. We would have gone with the AP Throw-in. But it does matter and that's why we have two different ways of putting the ball in play.

It is when the point of interruption can not be determined that we go with the AP. They are mutually exclusive.

Umm...what?

I'm looking at 4-36 right in front of me. The point of interruption is a method used to resume play. It'll either be resumed with:

1. Throw to team in control
2. Free throw or throw-in if play was stopped during such activity or if a team will be entitled to such activity.
3. Alternating possesion when a stopping occurs and there is no team control and there's no infraction, goal, or end of period/quarter.

So how is the AP not a POI? Unless you're trying to say that not all AP throw-ins are a result of having to use the POI?

[GoodwillRef]

Originally Posted by NoFussRef

A1 releases shot, A2 illegal screen -vs- B1 push foul on A2.

Shot sinks, we count bucket, report double foul (A2 and B1), and then went to AP for inbound. (NFHS)

Second guessing the AP, POI?

So B1 was pushing through and illegal screen by A1? I am just banging the illegal screen and be done with it.

[SWMOzebra]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

So B1 was pushing through an illegal screen by A1? I am just banging the illegal screen and be done with it.

+1

Was the push so bad that you thought it necessary to penalize?

[NoFussRef]

Originally Posted by SWMOzebra

+1

Was the push so bad that you thought it necessary to penalize?

Yeppers. I too tend to always go with first-come-first-served on sitchs like this, however this was an easy one for me, they both saw it coming, this was no "collision" and the push was at the exact same moment as the block.

I am far more likely to hand out doubles on the excessive bump-and-grind on the block than I am on a bad screen. It was B's decision to try and plow through while extending his arms into A's upper body. I had a great look at this one.

As for shot being long gone, the point-guard didn't wait for the screen to drive he stepped back and put up a jumper just as the offense was trying to set up.

(This was 8th grade Quad-A Boys. Even both coaches liked the double call. AP happened to be B's ball so I guess it might have looked right, even though we should've gone POI and they shouldn't have lost the next AP.)

Thanks again to this forum for helping new and old improve.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by NoFussRef

I am far more likely to hand out doubles on the excessive bump-and-grind on the block than I am on a bad screen.

Agree. And I am far more likely to hand out such double fouls early in the season, as well as early in the game.

[GoodwillRef]

Originally Posted by NoFussRef

Yeppers. I too tend to always go with first-come-first-served on sitchs like this, however this was an easy one for me, they both saw it coming, this was no "collision" and the push was at the exact same moment as the block.

I am far more likely to hand out doubles on the excessive bump-and-grind on the block than I am on a bad screen. It was B's decision to try and plow through while extending his arms into A's upper body. I had a great look at this one.

As for shot being long gone, the point-guard didn't wait for the screen to drive he stepped back and put up a jumper just as the offense was trying to set up.

(This was 8th grade Quad-A Boys. Even both coaches liked the double call. AP happened to be B's ball so I guess it might have looked right, even though we should've gone POI and they shouldn't have lost the next AP.)

Thanks again to this forum for helping new and old improve.

If the push was as bad as you say maybe just go with the foul on Team B if that was the one that everyone say.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

If the push was as bad as you say maybe just go with the foul on Team B if that was the one that everyone say.

He said it was an easy call to go DF, why are we questioning this as if he's calling a DF on a screen every game?