What does Freddy think?

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

I've been to Bangor...not sure many of the residents would even notice

Ah, shaddap!

Anyway, this is all very oddly timed. I called my first violation of player-running-out-of-bounds in years over the weekend (5-6 boys), and oddly enough, it was a double violation! Technically, I think this is only supposed to be offensive violation, but at that age, both a foot out of bounds, I whistled, looked puzzled for a second, told them both not to do that again, and simply went POI.

Oh, the guy who assigned the game? The author.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Ah, shaddap!

Anyway, this is all very oddly timed. I called my first violation of player-running-out-of-bounds in years over the weekend (5-6 boys), and oddly enough, it was a double violation! Technically, I think this is only supposed to be offensive violation, but at that age, both a foot out of bounds, I whistled, looked puzzled for a second, told them both not to do that again, and simply went POI.

Oh, the guy who assigned the game? The author.

It's not only an offensive violation. There's a case play that verifies that. I'll have to check, but I don't think POI is right for a double violation. I think you go to the arrow.

[just another ref]

If one player from each team has a foot out of bounds, I don't think you have a violation at all, at any level.

Perhaps we need further clarification of the play at hand.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

If one player from each team has a foot out of bounds, I don't think you have a violation at all, at any level.

Perhaps we need further clarification of the play at hand.

I think he meant they both were a foot out of bounds, not "had" a foot out of bounds.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I think he meant they both were a foot out of bounds, not "had" a foot out of bounds.

Right, as in 12 inches out of bounds (though it was a little more than that).

Anyway, are you sure you would go to the arrow? I think all double infractions result in POI, which would only lead to the arrow if there were no team control.

[Adam]

4-36-1, POI is for double fouls. 6-4-3c, simultaneous floor violations go straight to AP.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

6-4-3c, simultaneous floor violations go straight to AP.

Hmm, indeed so. Thanks. I wonder what the rationale is for that.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

4-36-1, POI is for double fouls. 6-4-3c, simultaneous floor violations go straight to AP.

Which brings up the next question. In this play, I find it very unlikely that they both went out at the same time. First thing that comes to mind is that the offensive player went out first, chased by the defender.

Bainsey?