Double-intentional-technical foul

[jhc2010]

A double-intentional-technical foul was called in today's NCAA Women's Tournament game between Ohio State and Georgia Tech. That's what the announcer at the arena called it. Is that possible in the NCAA or was the announcer and the press misinformed? What about high school rules?


The Columbus Dispatch:

"Lavender and Chelsea Regins got tied up underneath the basket.

Elbows flew and both were charged with intentional, technical fouls after a lengthy delay to allow the officials to review video. Regins appeared to throw the first blow."

[APG]

Sure...dead ball contact that can't be ignored is either flagrant technical foul or intentional technical foul. If opponents commit them against each other, you would have a double technical foul due to dead ball contact that was intentional (in the rule book definition).

[Scrapper1]

Actually, I believe that there is no such thing as an intentional technical foul in the women's ruleset. Rule 10-3 addresses player technical fouls and relates only to the women's game. Article 1.c is "committing a non-flagrant foul that involves contact or causes contact with an opponent while the ball is dead."

This is a technical foul charged directly to the player and play is resumed at the POI after the technical free throws. If it is part of a double technical foul, no free throws are awarded and play is resumed from the POI.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Actually, I believe that there is no such thing as an intentional technical foul in the women's ruleset. Rule 10-3 addresses player technical fouls and relates only to the women's game. Article 1.c is "committing a non-flagrant foul that involves contact or causes contact with an opponent while the ball is dead."

This is a technical foul charged directly to the player and play is resumed at the POI after the technical free throws. If it is part of a double technical foul, no free throws are awarded and play is resumed from the POI.

Correct, NCAA-W doesn't have an "Intentional Technical Foul" for dead ball contact. For NCAA-W it is just categorized as an unsporting technical.

[pizanno]

Originally Posted by jhc2010

A double-intentional-technical foul was called in today's NCAA Women's Tournament game between Ohio State and Georgia Tech. That's what the announcer at the arena called it. Is that possible in the NCAA or was the announcer and the press misinformed? What about high school rules?


The Columbus Dispatch:

"Lavender and Chelsea Regins got tied up underneath the basket.

Elbows flew and both were charged with intentional, technical fouls after a lengthy delay to allow the officials to review video. Regins appeared to throw the first blow."

Watched the replay online at ESPN3. Streaming is pretty cool as you can go straight to the play (1st half 5:24. 32:40 point of the video).

What's pretty clear from video:
1. #32 GT contacts with elbow #42 OSU during dead ball (after made basket, before throw-in).
2. #42 OSU does not contact #32
3. PA intially states fouls on both #32 and #42, but doesn't specify type of foul
4. Officials review play
5. After review, PA states "double intentional technical fouls"

What's not clear:
1. Whether the PA was informed by crew to announce initial determination of fouls
2. What verbage the crew reported to table for PA to announce "double intentional techs" which BadNews correctly points out doesn't exist.

What's absolutely clear: this color commentator has no freakin' clue!

I'm speculating that this crew made a decision to go with double fouls first, which is why the PA announced such. Then they went to the monitor to determine either dead/live ball status, or elbow above the shoulders (which would've given the ball back to OSU).

Upon review, they see it was a dead-ball, and determine elbow was not above the shoulders and report to official book double technicals. PA announces the erroneous verbage. even if they realize there wasn't a foul on OSU, they cannot recind it.

Even though many of us may not have TV games involving monitor review, we can help manage a sticky situation by telling the PA EXACTLY what to say (announce the visiting team foul first on double fouls), and when to say it (wait until I tell you to announce. talk to coaches first).

Partners getting together was good. Each official should affirm we are all in agreement on penalties and administration, and decide which two will talk to coaches, and what exactly will be said. This will be most important when all crew members are asked to write a game report.

Hey, don't look now but we're discussing a women's game. Careful, we might learn something...

[Adam]

Originally Posted by pizanno

even if they realize there wasn't a foul on OSU, they cannot recind it.

Why is this part relevant to this play? How would the replay show whether or not the OSU player committed an unsporting technical?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Why is this part relevant to this play? How would the replay show whether or not the OSU player committed an unsporting technical?

They could have been looking for any flagrant act that occurred.

[pizanno]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Why is this part relevant to this play? How would the replay show whether or not the OSU player committed an unsporting technical?

I think they might have erred in initially assessing a foul to OSU player. Again, no contact or visible unsporting action by OSU player on video replay. She received a pretty rough elbow shot to the neck area. Officials right on it, and both point to the GT player.

The PA announced two fouls (not technical) before the monitor review. Don't know how/why this happened. Only after the review did PA announce techs.

I would have preferred the crew report only foul on GT player, then go to the monitor to determine if any of the following occured:

* elbow contact above shoulders by GT player (upgrade)
* flagrant action by either player

Clearly this is a atypical play on a huge stage, but I think we have all been in similar situations when surprised by rough play. So my point was to leave yourself the opportunity to upgrade, rather than being so quick to call a double foul.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Why is this part relevant to this play? How would the replay show whether or not the OSU player committed an unsporting technical?

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

They could have been looking for any flagrant act that occurred.

From the 2010-11 NCAA Rule Book:

Originally Posted by Pg 11 & 12

For the first time in women’s basketball, the courtside monitor may be used to review a flagrant foul. Although this has been a rule for men’s basketball, the women’s basketball rules committee felt it necessary to adopt this rule giving all officials access to use the courtside monitor to penalize basketball’s most egregious act. Both the men’s and women’s committee added to that rule the option for the official to call an intentional personal or a technical foul for contact during a dead ball when after reviewing the monitor it is discovered that a flagrant foul did not occur.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by pizanno

I think they might have erred in initially assessing a foul to OSU player. Again, no contact or visible unsporting action by OSU player on video replay. She received a pretty rough elbow shot to the neck area. Officials right on it, and both point to the GT player.

The PA announced two fouls (not technical) before the monitor review. Don't know how/why this happened. Only after the review did PA announce techs.

I would have preferred the crew report only foul on GT player, then go to the monitor to determine if any of the following occured:

* elbow contact above shoulders by GT player (upgrade)
* flagrant action by either player

Clearly this is a atypical play on a huge stage, but I think we have all been in similar situations when surprised by rough play. So my point was to leave yourself the opportunity to upgrade, rather than being so quick to call a double foul.

I haven't seen the play, but the way it was presented indicated both players were swinging their elbows to some degree. Whether they made contact or not really doesn't matter, unless such contact was above the shoulders.

Are you saying the OSU player may not have even swung her elbows in response?

[pizanno]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I haven't seen the play, but the way it was presented indicated both players were swinging their elbows to some degree. Whether they made contact or not really doesn't matter, unless such contact was above the shoulders.

Are you saying the OSU player may not have even swung her elbows in response?

Players locked up under basket. Ball goes in basket. GT player elbow swing to OSU player neck/face area. OSU players backpedals with hands to face. Immediate whistle.

Only one elbow.

Hard to beleive, I know, but media reports got it wrong.

Watching it again, after the basket, the video cuts away to crowd shot and player who scored. When they come back to backcourt view, OSU player is complaining to officials with hands to her mouth, so she could have said "I just got popped in my M#*%F$!@n mouth!" and T'ed for that, but that would be a tough one.