Girls' game the other night...A1 driving down the lane, B1 in position to take charge. A1 gets fouled by B2 on the arm as she shoots. A1 then proceeds to charge into B1 before she returns to the floor and after she is fouled by B2. I'm Lead and blow whistle for foul on B2 before the contact. Partner from Trail position blows whistle JUST AFTER me and signals player control before checking to see if I had blown my whistle--in a sense, double whistles. What is the correct call?

We ended up waiving off the player control since my foul came first and put A1 at the line for 2 shots. After thinking about it as we were administering the FT's, this is what I thought we should have done:

SINCE MY PARTNER SIGNALED player control AND I signaled a foul too (even though mine came first), I think we should have called both fouls, put A1 at the line for 2 FT's with no players on the lane, and then go to AP. I think the key here is that my partner signaled too. What do you guys think?

Not sure what the textbook answer is, but. . .
 

I have always beleived that you should get the call right. You saw the same contact your partner saw (with respect to A1 running into B1). You both agree about what contact you saw and when it occurred. You saw contact by B2 that your partner did not see AND you saw the play in such a way that you believe the contact by B2 contributed to A1 hitting B1. You share this info with your partner and he accepts what you saw - it seems like the right result was reached.

the foul by B2 did not cause the ball to become dead; the player control foul by A1 does cause the ball to become dead and no goal can be scored; both fouls are assessed; I'd have A1 shoot her free throws with no one on the lane and then it would be B's ball, due to the player control foul on A1; if A1 hits the second foul shot, B can run the endline

Although this is the textbook interpretation, I believe you must be sure that the foul by B2 did not cause A1 to "charge" into B1.

The sitch detailed above is completely similar to Casebook play 4.19.6SitA-if anyone wants a reference.

Being fouled by B1 does not release A from bearing the responsibility of committing a player control foul.

Both fouls are to be called, reported and assessed.

A shots two with the lane cleared, B ball afterwards.

I think this is slightly similar to the following:

A1 drives and is fouled. However, after the foul, A travels just before releasing the ball that goes in. You cannot award A the "and-1" after (s)he traveled. Call both, the foul and the violation. A gets two.

Mike

Foul on B1.

PC foul on A1.

A1 shoots 2 FTs with no one on the lane.

B's ball for a throw-in on the endline.

The fact that your whistle was first doesn't mean your ignore the PC.

I think this is what's called a "false multiple foul" if I'm not mistaken. I've never called one of these, but in this case, if you don't think B2's contact caused A1 to foul B1, you have to call both on the double whistle. IMO, the only way you have one foul here is if you are the only whistle on the play AND/OR you deem the first foul the cause of the 2nd.

Nope, it's a false double foul. The fouls are committed by members of each team, as opposed to members of the same team.

You're absolutely right...my bad. Good thing I don't have to take the test again!

If my partner does NOT get the PC, can I have both fouls? Can I call 2 fouls on one play...the same play?

Sure, you could.

And you could also call a multiple foul.

Good luck explaining either one to the players, table, coaches, and spectators.

Didn't we already establish that this isn't a multiple foul?

When you report the fouls, you don't need to use rulebook terminology. Just report the foul on each player and explain how they will be administered. They don't need to hear the jargon.

Gonna get those reading glasses today, 'cause
 

I could have sworn that Indy's original post said that B2's contact caused the contact with B1 - I guess I just imagined it. I was reading all these posts saying we have two fouls and asking myself, "How can they say that!?" Then I re-read Indy's post and just said Duh. Good call guys.

But if he said what I thought he said, then my original statement stands.

Yes, we did. It's a false double foul. Mark's point was that the likelihood of one official calling both fouls in this situation is about the same as any official calling a multiple foul. It just doesn't happen very often. I've been officiating 10 years and have never called either of these personally.

Chuck