AAU Followup

DrakeM · #1 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2003, 03:56am

Tonight I refereed the same team that had the kid I ejected the other night, here's how it went.
My partner had them the night before and didn't recognize the kid, so he probably was suspended for one game.

Anyway.....
His first foul of the game was an intentional foul.
Off a steal, he grabs kid with one hand while whacking at him with the other FROM BEHIND!

Late third quarter, he sets a screen and locks up the defenders arm as the the defender is trying to go around the screen. I call a hold. He complains about the call, but not anything worth getting upset about.
Ensuing possesion I call him for a two-hand hand check/shove as his man is driving to the basket. After the whistle the offensive player kept going to the basket and while in the air, our angry young man tries to UNDERCUT him! "Tweet" WHACK!
Can anyone say "anger management"?
Aftet the "T" some brainiac in the stands yellls down, "That's the second game in a row you've done this to us!"

Coach took him out and never brought him back in.

Blackhawk357 · #2 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2003, 04:08am

Drake,
You've gotta luv those clueless fans

(Probably Daddy)
Sounds like one time you can say "thanks for the help, Coach".
The kid would benefit most from a league suspension for the remainder of the season. Maybe that way everyone involved (kid, parent, coach) would learn something.

Blackhawk

Nevadaref · #3 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2003, 04:19am

Quote:

Originally posted by DrakeM

"That's the second game in a row you've done this to us!"

I would take this as directed towards the kid, not you!

DrakeM · #4 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2003, 04:24am

I would agree, but I don't think the kid's name was
"C'mon ref!"

ChuckElias · #5 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2003, 08:35am

Quote:

Originally posted by DrakeM

Ensuing possesion I call him for a two-hand hand check/shove as his man is driving to the basket. After the whistle the offensive player kept going to the basket and while in the air, our angry young man tries to UNDERCUT him! "Tweet" WHACK!

Drake, this is an interesting situation. You have a personal foul for the push. Then the attempted undercut. The ball is still live, even after the personal foul. So was this a technical foul ("WHACK")? If there is contact, and the ball is still live, normally it should be personal. But I've never seen one player called for two personal fouls on the same play. (At least, not in basketball. I've seen it in lacrosse, tho!

)

Was your T b/c of additional contact? Or was it b/c you thought he was being unsportsmanlike? And in general, has anyone ever called, or would anyone ever consider, calling two personals on the same player for the same play?

I'm not being critical of Drake's call. The whole situation just started a wierd train of thought. (Shut up, JR!

)

Chuck

DrakeM · #6 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2003, 09:05am

Actually Chuck, the play was dead on my handcheck call and it was one of those plays where the player just finishes the drive ANYWAY. Am I clear? So in my mind it was a dead ball act. The T was partly because of the contact and in my mind (i know, that's a dangerous place)

there was some bad intent on the kid's part. (unsportsmanlike)
As to your other question, I guess it would be possible to have a personal, followed by a intentional personal, or flagrant personal, but for the sake of simplification, even though not "technically" correct, a "T" is the easiest
way out of the play. (how's that for a run-on sentence?)

Blackhawk357 · #7 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2003, 09:08am

Quote:

Originally posted by DrakeM

Ensuing possesion I call him for a two-hand hand check/shove as his man is DRIVING to the basket. AFTER the whistle the offensive player kept going to the basket and while in the air, our angry young man tries to UNDERCUT him! "Tweet" WHACK!

Chuck,
It sounds like the foul was called before A1 was in the act of shooting to me. If that is the case the ball would become dead b/c of the first foul.

You bring up an interesting point though. Let's say he was shooting on the first foul, then was undercut by the same player. Can you really have mulitple fouls onthe same player? Good question.

(damn, they always beat me to the punch

)

[Edited by Blackhawk357 on Mar 20th, 2003 at 08:11 AM]

ChuckElias · #8 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2003, 10:09am

I understand the situation now, Drake. Thanks. As you can tell, I was envisioning that the player was continuing his shooting motion.

I think in your situation, I would agree with you and say that the attempted undercut was unsportsmanlike. But it is kind of an interesting question, isn't it?

Chuck

ChuckElias · #9 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2003, 10:10am

Hey Blackhawk, it was a good effort!! LOL. Now you know how I feel when Bob J beats me to the punch.

Jurassic Referee · #10 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2003, 10:18am

Quote:

Originally posted by ChuckElias
[/B]

Drake, this is an interesting situation. You have a personal foul for the push. Then the attempted undercut. The ball is still live, even after the personal foul. So was this a technical foul ("WHACK")? If there is contact, and the ball is still live, normally it should be personal. But I've never seen one player called for two personal fouls on the same play.
Was your T b/c of additional contact? Or was it b/c you thought he was being unsportsmanlike? And in general, has anyone ever called, or would anyone ever consider, calling two personals on the same player for the same play?

I'm not being critical of Drake's call. The whole situation just started a wierd train of thought. [/B][/QUOTE]Wierd?

I guess that this would be an example of the genus "falsus multipulsus foulsus", which is thought only to exist in small IAABO outposts in the wilds of the state of Ohio.There have been rumors of sightings in other locales,but these have been discounted as Urban Legends.

Seriously,this probably fits the definition of a "false multiple foul". A multiple foul stipulates that the fouls are committed by 2 or more TEAMMATES against the same opponent(R4-19-10),while a false multiple foul says that there is 2 or more fouls by the same TEAM(R4-19-11).so,you would have a personal foul,followed by an intentional or flagrant personal foul-both charged to the same player.Your next question is "how many shots?".My next answer is each foul will carry it's regular penalty,as per "summary of penalties #7.

The WIERD thing is that the rulebook says that an airborne shooter can commit a technical foul,but it doesn't mention if a technical foul can be committed on an airborne shooter(R4-19-5c). Why is that??

rockyroad · #11 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2003, 10:19am

Does this kid lve in the Portland, Oregon area?? Is his last name Wallace by any chance?? Or maybe he's in Indiana and his last name is Artest?? Seems like he's been watching Rasheed and Ron a little too much...

Dan_ref · #12 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2003, 11:09am

Quote:

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

I guess that this would be an example of the genus "falsus multipulsus foulsus", which is thought only to exist in small IAABO outposts in the wilds of the state of Ohio.There have been rumors of sightings in other locales,but these have been discounted as Urban Legends.

(whispers to audience)
"Here we see JR is trying to lure the elusive MTD out into the open with some bait. How cleverly disguised the bait is remains to be seen, but if he is succesful we'll soon be inundated with a torrent of words. This is the well know defensive mechanism used by the MTD during times of stress."

Drake, this kid sounds like a lunatic. Really. Does he have any skills to go with his attitude, or is he just the coach's kid?

canuckrefguy · #13 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2003, 11:29am

This punk shouldn't even be allowed on the court.

Glad to hear ya took care of business...

Back In The Saddle · #14 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2003, 04:47pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
...so,you would have a personal foul,followed by an intentional or flagrant personal foul-both charged to the same player....

Perhaps I'm exposing my ignorance here...but, if I understand correctly, the first foul was not committed against a shooter (airborne or otherwise). So the ball became dead on the foul. So the second act, a potentially flagrant or malicious act, against an opponent during a dead ball, would be a technical foul, would it not?

Jurassic Referee · #15 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2003, 05:31pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Back In The Saddle

Quote:

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
...so,you would have a personal foul,followed by an intentional or flagrant personal foul-both charged to the same player....

Perhaps I'm exposing my ignorance here...but, if I understand correctly, the first foul was not committed against a shooter (airborne or otherwise). So the ball became dead on the foul. So the second act, a potentially flagrant or malicious act, against an opponent during a dead ball, would be a technical foul, would it not?

BITS,if you go back and read the whole post,I was answering Chuck's "what if?" question about what you would call if a player fouled a shooter twice on the same shot attempt.