False Double Foul

[Burtis449]

National Federation Rules.
A1 has is going in for a layup (not successful) while B1 grabs him from behind...Intentional Foul. A1 now turns and bumps/pushes B1 enough to have a technical foul called on him. (not flagrant just unsporting "T")
A1 shoots two (2) with the lane empty then we go to the other end and team B shoots two (2) at their end.
Then the ball was put in play by Team B at the division line opposite the table.
It was argued (by the coach of team A) that we should go to the arrow because the intentional foul is usually followed by a throw-in by the offended team. In this case that would have been team A.
The closest thing I can find is Case 4.19.9 situation "C". In this case the coach of Team A causes the "T" not the Team A player but I don't think that makes any difference. We have a False Double Foul the second part of which is technical.
Did we get it right or is there another case that I may have missed which would have changed our ruling?

[JugglingReferee]

You got it right.

It is a false double - penalize each foul. A looses their throw-in because of the T they committed.

Use the arrow for situations where the penalties cancel - eg: double foul. But and INT and a subsequent dead-ball T, even if this T was retaliatory to the INT, does not have cancelled penalties.

[APG]

Coach argued wrong. You handled the play correctly.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Burtis449

National Federation Rules.
A1 has is going in for a layup (not successful) while B1 grabs him from behind...Intentional Foul. A1 now turns and bumps/pushes B1 enough to have a technical foul called on him. (not flagrant just unsporting "T")
A1 shoots two (2) with the lane empty then we go to the other end and team B shoots two (2) at their end.
Then the ball was put in play by Team B at the division line opposite the table.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Burtis449

National Federation Rules.
A1 has is going in for a layup (not successful) while B1 grabs him from behind...Intentional Foul. A1 now turns and bumps/pushes B1 enough to have a technical foul called on him. (not flagrant just unsporting "T")

You administered it correctly. I have just one minor quibble, and it's pretty minor. But by rule, an unsporting technical foul is a non-contact foul. In your case, you actually have an intentional technical foul (for dead ball contact).

It makes no difference in the penalties or how you administer them. It's strictly terminology. And it's possible that you just don't care about the terminology. But since I am forever harping on "know your definitions", I thought I'd throw it out there.

[JugglingReferee]

Consistency is good, Scrapper.

[stir22]

Its this kind of play that confuses me. Not the play, nor the administration, but it seems to me that there are so many of these nuances to the rules that I cannot get a grasp on all of them. (just finished my third year)

This is probably a stupid question, but what does the "false" mean? I understand the double, and the foul, but do not understand what the "false" means.

Many thanks!

[APG]

Originally Posted by stir22

Its this kind of play that confuses me. Not the play, nor the administration, but it seems to me that there are so many of these nuances to the rules that I cannot get a grasp on all of them. (just finished my third year)

This is probably a stupid question, but what does the "false" mean? I understand the double, and the foul, but do not understand what the "false" means.

Many thanks!

It means one of the aspects that would have made it a double/multiple foul is missing.

[tref]

The last foul occured prior to the clock starting after the first foul.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

It means one of the aspects that would have made it a double/multiple foul is missing.

Originally Posted by tref

The last foul occured prior to the clock starting after the first foul.

In the original play, the two fouls did not occur at (approximately) the same time. Thus, they do not constitute a double foul.