Referee Mistake - not a correctable error

[bd41flpk]

Scenario:

B1 commits a common foul on A1 which is Team B's 7th team foul. As the official is reporting the foul, B1 slams the ball to the floor and is assessed an un-sporting technical foul.

Referee's unfortunately assess the technical foul 1st and then realize that the 1:1 should be administered 1st.

Officials then administer the 1:1 w/no players on the line and the give team A the ball out of bounds at the division line.

Truth be told this is NOT a correctable error. but rather an 'official error' that is corrected as a result of doing the right thing.

Just wanted to check if this is the proper procedure, since the foul shots should have been administered in the 'order of occurrence'?

The results would seem an easy out; yet were the rules followed accordingly?

Opinions welcome.

[Adam]

Not that big a deal. Yes, they should be shot in the right order, but if they aren't, you don't go back and re-shoot. Everyone got their shots, A got the ball. Nothing to correct. Worse case, you give a quick explanation to the coaches and move on.

[Jeremy Hohn]

In NF Rules, you always end up with a throw-in by the violated team. No biggie. In NCAA, you are POI which will make a bigger difference depending on when the "T" occured.

[Zoochy]

Originally Posted by bd41flpk

Scenario:

B1 commits a common foul on A1 which is Team B's 7th team foul. As the official is reporting the foul, B1 slams the ball to the floor and is assessed an un-sporting technical foul.

Referee's unfortunately assess the technical foul 1st and then realize that the 1:1 should be administered 1st.

Officials then administer the 1:1 w/no players on the line and the give team A the ball out of bounds at the division line.

Truth be told this is NOT a correctable error. but rather an 'official error' that is corrected as a result of doing the right thing.

Just wanted to check if this is the proper procedure, since the foul shots should have been administered in the 'order of occurrence'?

The results would seem an easy out; yet were the rules followed accordingly?

Opinions welcome.

A Coach told me this happened in his game. But the officials took the points off the board and reshot the fouls in the correct order (Personal Foul then Technical Foul). All 4 free throws were made the 1st time. The team only made 2 of the 4 on the 'reshoot'. They lost by 2 points.

[bd41flpk]

Originally Posted by Zoochy

A Coach told me this happened in his game. But the officials took the points off the board and reshot the fouls in the correct order (Personal Foul then Technical Foul). All 4 free throws were made the 1st time. The team only made 2 of the 4 on the 'reshoot'. They lost by 2 points.

Funny you should mention that....one of the crew I was with when this actually occurred wanted to do just that....do a 'hindu' (as they used to call it back in the day) and re-do the play as it should have been administered.

Glad to hear that what he stated was of course lunacy and the consequences could be quite harmful to the outcome of the game.

Thanks !

[BillyMac]

Officials may correct an error if a rule is inadvertently set aside and
results in:
a. Failure to award a merited free throw.
b. Awarding an unmerited free throw.
c. Permitting a wrong player to attempt a free throw.
d. Attempting a free throw at the wrong basket.
e. Erroneously counting or canceling a score.

[truerookie]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Officials may correct an error if a rule is inadvertently set aside and
results in:
a. Failure to award a merited free throw.
b. Awarding an unmerited free throw.
c. Permitting a wrong player to attempt a free throw.
d. Attempting a free throw at the wrong basket.
e. Erroneously counting or canceling a score.

Billy, thanks for posting this. I find it interesting that 4 out of 5 items that is covered under 2-10 pertains to free-throws and somehow we still manage not to get it right.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by truerookie

Billy, thanks for posting this. I find it interesting that 4 out of 5 items that is covered under 2-10 pertains to free-throws and somehow we still manage not to get it right.

And this is the way to remember CEs, IMO. 4 cases involving free throws and erroneously counting or canceling a score is the fifth. Not a whole lot is correctable.

[truerookie]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

And this is the way to remember CEs, IMO. 4 cases involving free throws and erroneously counting or canceling a score is the fifth. Not a whole lot is correctable.

Rich, this is true. It ruffles my feathers when points are taking off the board when free-throws are merited even if they are administered in the wrong order.