Multiple Foul
 

...But didn't call it as such.

A1 deeks a guy near the hoopthen spinsorama. Mid-spinorama A1 gets bumped by B1. Tweet. The bump sends A1 in a direction he'd never go. While in that direction, B2 comes from behind and bumps A1 with more force than B1 used.

Both fouls were in the continuation phase.

It went through my mind, "oh look - a multiple foul" but I stuck with just the one.

Go For All The Gusto You Can ...
 

Not a big risk taker, are you? I bet that your favorite ice cream flavor is vanilla.

Wait! You're from Canada and you have misspelled 'dekes'?

I admit that I did not know how to spell that word. lol

The More You Know . . .
 

Deeks.
Hoopthen.
Spinsorama.
As much as I try to keep up on rulebook terminology, it seems that the technical definitions for some officiating terms still evade me. :o
Can't find any of those terms in Rule 4. Are they exclusive to Canada? I have so much to learn, eh. :)

First one is a hockey term. I assume it is one of the first words in the "Fun with Dick and Jane" primer (Canadian version).

Traveling. :)

Système International D'Unités ...
 

Stupid Metric language.

Was watching the 2A state championship game. Game was held at an arena in a rural town between that local town's high school which had made a cinderella run in the state tournament, wearing blue, and a rival school 15 minutes away which was the favorite going into the tournament, wearing white. High emotions, pretty close game. 2 minutes left in the third quarter and white was leading by about 10. White player A1 grabbed an offensive rebound and a blue player B1 came in and committed an obvious common foul on A1 when trying to steal the ball. Before the official could blow his whistle, B2 came over and grabbed A1 over his back for an obvious intentional foul. Occurred to me that it should've been a multiple foul, but I think with emotions as high as they were, the intentional foul was all that was needed.

Actually, that would be a false multiple.

This is not a multiple. Can you tell us why?

No such thing as a multiple foul? ;)

once you have blown the whistle for the common foul...the ball becomes dead....all other infractions/fouls are ignored unless it is deemed to be a flagrant foul.

neither of the two posts above describe contact that is flagrant, therefore the contact is ignored.....

You're very close.

Very close indeed. I'll give you a hint. All other infractions/fouls are ignored unless it is deemed to be a flagrant or __________ foul.

I Want To Pick A Prize From The Top Shelf ...
 

What do I win?

One free all expenses paid trip to your very own pantry or refrigerator for a snack of your choice. And your wife can't tell you no. Eat whatever you want.

As you should have since the second one was neither intentional nor flagrant.

JR said the player was in the act of shooting...thus the ball wasn't dead on the first opponent's contact.

Nothing, the question wasn't for you.

Reviewing foul definitions... Sure seems to be a multiple foul. Two teammates committed personal fouls against the same opponent at approximately the same time. Maybe I didn't make it clear that the common foul which came first wasn't called. The intentional foul came after, but they were close enough together that the official didn't have time to blow his whistle for the common foul. The intentional foul was the only one called. Granted, I'm only speculating that the official would've called the common foul, but it sure looked like a foul from my vantage point.

Let's assume the first was a foul. The ball becomes dead as soon as the foul is committed, not when the whistle blows. So even if the second foul comes before the whistle for the first foul, it's a dead ball foul. The second would have to be a technical foul, thus it doesn't qualify as a multiple foul.

Now most of the time, when this second foul comes in so fast we don't have time to whistle the first, we'll just go with the 2nd.

But you cannot, by rule, call it a multiple foul. It's a false multiple, and each foul gets its own penalty.

Unless a player on the team that was fouled had started a try (continuous motion).

...which is what I believe the OP was trying to say when he said "Both fouls were in the continuation phase."

You're right, but I was talking about the other play, the on that rikardo saw.

Fair enough....I rarely go back and read the entire thread to make sure I know the specific context of each post unless it seems unclear to me....and it bit me this time.

Yeah, I've never done that. :)

If the ball becomes dead at the moment the first foul is committed, how can a multiple foul even exist? Does this mean that multiple fouls can only occur when a player is in the act of shooting?

It means it has to happen simultaneously...B1 and B2 foul A1 at the same time.

right you are. Missed that point. I have a subconscious habit of not paying attention to JR I guess.

I feel weird being called JR.

JR is Jurassic.

I'm Juggs! :D

Must be an Anti-Canadian bias. :)

For the most part, yes. But also: