False Double Foul?

[tref]

If it makes you feel any better, one of my 3 second calls on the NEW defensive team (quick steal up top) happened last year

"My badd coach" is all I could say
Stuff happens, we either learn from it & improve or we dont.
I'm still trying to master responding to acts vs reacting to them.

[Toren]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Good situation. I see 5 possibilities...and the way you described it and administered it doesn't match any of them. You called it as if it were #4 but you described it as it were #1 or #2, or perhaps #3.

All start with a T for unsportsmanlike conduct on A1.

1. If the two shoves were approximately the same time and all action occurred before the try ended:

• The shove by B1 was a personal foul.
• The shove back by A1 was also a personal foul.
• Same time makes it a double foul.
• Penalized the T....2 shots and the ball for B.

2. If the two shoves were NOT approximately the same time (B1 shoves then A1 gets back up and shoves back) and all action occurred before the try ended :

• The shove by B1 was a personal foul.
• The shove back by A1 was also a personal foul
• Not the same time makes it a false double foul.
• Penalize all fouls in the order of occurance. T, personal, personal.

3. If the two shoves were NOT approximately the same time (B1 shoves then A1 gets back up and shoves back) and all the last shove only was after the try ended:

• The shove by B1 was a personal foul.
• The shove back by A1 was a technical foul
• Penalize all fouls in the order of occurance. T, personal, T.

4. If the two shoves were approximately the same time and both were after the try ended:

• The shove by B1 was a technical foul.
• The shove back by A1 was a technical foul
• Same time makes it a double foul.
• Penalize the first T....2 shots and the ball to B.

5. If the two shoves were NOT approximately the same time (B1 shoves then A1 gets back up and shoves back) and both were after the try ended:

• The shove by B1 was a technical foul.
• The shove back by A1 was a technical foul
• Not the same time makes it a false double foul.
• Penalize all fouls in the order of occurance. T, T, T.

The basket would count in any case.

A1 may or may not be DQ'd depending on which scenario really happened.

Whether the fouls were close enough in time to be considered "approximately" the same time, is your judgment.

You could declare actions a fight making both actions flagrant and DQ both of them in any case.

This was a very helpful breakdown. Thank you for taking the time.

Unsporting T.

Push in the back, while ball is in flight. Ball hits rim and clearly won't go in.
Then Player A1 retaliates and pushes back.

So it's #3. T, personal foul, T. So we should have shot 4 free throws plus the ball for Team B.

My thinking as I was talking to my partner, was upgrading the personal foul to a T because I felt the push might have been on purpose to get A1 to retaliate. In either case, I wanted to send a strong message to Team A and to Team B that this kind of non sense wasn't going to be tolerated. This is why we went with T, T, T. But we should have administered it 6 free throws, 2 for Team B, followed by two by Team A, followed by 2 for Team B and the ball OOB for Team B. Am I understanding it correctly?

Now that I think back on it though, I probably could have deemed it a fight and just DQ both players. That would have sent a much stronger message and much easier to administer

[Toren]

Now that I give it more thought, I'm realizing I'm trying to rewrite the book.

It happened like #3, so we needed to penalize like #3. I can't penalize #5 when it happened like #3.

Disregard my previous post.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Toren

Now that I give it more thought, I'm realizing I'm trying to rewrite the book.

It happened like #3, so we needed to penalize like #3. I can't penalize #5 when it happened like #3.

Disregard my previous post.

And because you're going to end up tossing A1 with 2 T's when everything is sorted out, I'd probably call B1's personal foul an intentional foul....for no other reason than to send a message that B1's shove was also serious and would not be tolerated.

It will not change anything since A, if I'm reading correctly, was over 10 fouls. The same number of shots would be taken either way and B would still be getting the ball after the final T was penalized. Even if A were not over 10 fouls, I'd call it intentional and let A have the 2 shots.

Doing so would go a long way towards containing any escalation from either side.

[Toren]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

And because you're going to end up tossing A1 with 2 T's when everything is sorted out, I'd probably call B1's personal foul an intentional foul....for no other reason than to send a message that B1's shove was also serious and would not be tolerated.

It will not change anything since A, if I'm reading correctly, was over 10 fouls. The same number of shots would be taken either way and B would still be getting the ball after the final T was penalized. Even if A were not over 10 fouls, I'd call it intentional and let A have the 2 shots.

Doing so would go a long way towards contain any escalation from either side.

Neither team was in the bonus. Now I'm wondering what I said to make you think that.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tref

Or a pc on the shooter, reason why holding the whistle til the play ends makes sense.

AFAIC, he held the whistle just fine. He waited (inadvertently or not) until the shot was in the air. No need to hold any longer, there won't be a rebound.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Toren

Neither team was in the bonus. Now I'm wondering what I said to make you think that.

I got it from the quote below but I may have read it incorrectly.....if you were speaking as if the middle foul were a T.

Originally Posted by Toren

My thinking as I was talking to my partner, was upgrading the personal foul to a T because I felt the push might have been on purpose to get A1 to retaliate. In either case, I wanted to send a strong message to Team A and to Team B that this kind of non sense wasn't going to be tolerated. This is why we went with T, T, T. But we should have administered it 6 free throws, 2 for Team B, followed by two by Team A, followed by 2 for Team B and the ball OOB for Team B. Am I understanding it correctly?

[Camron Rust]

Now, all that said, I THINK that the middle foul by B1 SHOULD be a T....not specifically by rule, but by common sense.

At its core, it really was an unsporting act in retaliation for an unsporting act. If the trigger was worthy of a T, the response should be no less. Regardless of the live/dead ball status' effect on contact fouls with regards to them being considered personal or technical, I think that fouls involving contact but in an unsporting manner should simply be T's.

So, in the end, I think the fact that you called 3 T's was not really "wrong".

If I were in a game with you, and that is what you wanted to do, I wouldn't resist it.

[tref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

AFAIC, he held the whistle just fine. He waited (inadvertently or not) until the shot was in the air. No need to hold any longer, there won't be a rebound.

Okay my friend (same sitch minus the double fouls) although the try has ended & Toren cracked on the great T, A5 soars in, catches the miss right off the rim, cocks it & bangs it through... the "play" has not ended IMO.

I'm not trying to wipe that highlight play for a T that could be had after the entire play is complete. The only way to make sure we dont mess this play up is to practice holding our whistle when these situations present themselves. I understand how it could happen though, its not too common to have a T on the defense in transition witn a scoring opportunity

[tref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Now, all that said, I THINK that the middle foul by B1 SHOULD be a T....not specifically by rule, but by common sense.

At its core, it really was an unsporting act in retaliation for an unsporting act. If the trigger was worthy of a T, the response should be no less. Regardless of the live/dead ball status' effect on contact fouls with regards to them being considered personal or technical, I think that fouls involving contact but in an unsporting manner should simply be T's.

So, in the end, I think the fact that you called 3 T's was not really "wrong".

If I were in a game with you, and that is what you wanted to do, I wouldn't resist it.

I really loved the great points you made in your first post!! Calling the intentional foul on B1
when we toss A1 for his 2nd provides us an opportunity to show we are fair.

But, surely you don't suggest that we upgrade a personal to a technical for live ball contact?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tref

Okay my friend (same sitch minus the double fouls) although the try has ended & Toren cracked on the great T, A5 soars in, catches the miss right off the rim, cocks it & bangs it through... the "play" has not ended IMO.

I'm not trying to wipe that highlight play for a T that could be had after the entire play is complete. The only way to make sure we dont mess this play up is to practice holding our whistle when these situations present themselves. I understand how it could happen though, its not too common to have a T on the defense in transition witn a scoring opportunity

Well, I'm going off of the precedent of the injured player, where they say (in NFHS) to blow it dead when the shot is released.

Now, if in your case, I see A2 flying in from behind ready to grab a rebound, I'll hold another beat. But without an obvious imminent "highlight play", I'll kill it before A2 gets off the floor.

I'm just not that inclined to worry about highlight plays, but hey, I'm not doing state championship games yet, so when that happens....

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by tref

I really loved the great points you made in your first post!! Calling the intentional foul on B1
when we toss A1 for his 2nd provides us an opportunity to show we are fair.

But, surely you don't suggest that we upgrade a personal to a technical for live ball contact?

I don't mean to suggest the current rules support such a conclusion but that I think they should be made to support such a conclusion.

However, it is often the case that situations that result in live ball contact also include non-contact elements....such as verbal assaults. You could always call a T for that part of the incident and be within the rules.

I just don't like the discontinuity in the infraction to penalty mapping....an attempt to contact in an unsportsmanlike manner and a miss being a T while an attempt to contact in an unsportsmanlike manner with contact being personal. I think the rules should be changed to allow T's for unsportsmanlike acts, even if they involve contact during a live ball.

[dsqrddgd909]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Good situation. I see 5 possibilities...and the way you described it and administered it doesn't match any of them. You called it as if it were #4 but you described it as it were #1 or #2, or perhaps #3.

All start with a T for unsportsmanlike conduct on A1.

1. If the two shoves were approximately the same time and all action occurred before the try ended:

• The shove by B1 was a personal foul.
• The shove back by A1 was also a personal foul.
• Same time makes it a double foul.
• Penalized the T....2 shots and the ball for B.

2. If the two shoves were NOT approximately the same time (B1 shoves then A1 gets back up and shoves back) and all action occurred before the try ended :

• The shove by B1 was a personal foul.
• The shove back by A1 was also a personal foul
• Not the same time makes it a false double foul.
• Penalize all fouls in the order of occurance. T, personal, personal.

3. If the two shoves were NOT approximately the same time (B1 shoves then A1 gets back up and shoves back) and all the last shove only was after the try ended:

• The shove by B1 was a personal foul.
• The shove back by A1 was a technical foul
• Penalize all fouls in the order of occurance. T, personal, T.

4. If the two shoves were approximately the same time and both were after the try ended:

• The shove by B1 was a technical foul.
• The shove back by A1 was a technical foul
• Same time makes it a double foul.
• Penalize the first T....2 shots and the ball to B.

5. If the two shoves were NOT approximately the same time (B1 shoves then A1 gets back up and shoves back) and both were after the try ended:

• The shove by B1 was a technical foul.
• The shove back by A1 was a technical foul
• Not the same time makes it a false double foul.
• Penalize all fouls in the order of occurance. T, T, T.

The basket would count in any case.

A1 may or may not be DQ'd depending on which scenario really happened.

Whether the fouls were close enough in time to be considered "approximately" the same time is your judgment.

You could declare actions a fight making both actions flagrant and DQ both of them in any case.

Wow, +1. Now I have to do 2 things. Re-read (and this time truly understand) rule 4 and pray I don't get this situation until I do.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by dsqrddgd909

Wow, +1. Now I have to do 2 things. Re-read (and this time truly understand) rule 4 and pray I don't get this situation until I do.

Some people find it easier to go on principles rather than enumerated lists of possibilities....I do....and it is a lot easier to learn basic principles than to memorize a million variations of case plays. Yet, some people (not you) insist on a case play for every possibility.

Basic principles...

• the ball remains live until the try ends (made or missed) when a foul other than player control foul occurs after the release (or a defensive foul occurs after the shooting motion begins).
• contact fouls during a live ball are personal fouls.
• contact fouls during a dead ball are (generally) technical fouls.
• a double foul happens at approximately the same time
• double fouls effectively offset (but are still recorded as if they were individual fouls).

That is all you need to know to resolve all of the above scenarios.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

At its core, it really was an unsporting act in retaliation for an unsporting act. If the trigger was worthy of a T, the response should be no less. Regardless of the live/dead ball status' effect on contact fouls with regards to them being considered personal or technical, I think that fouls involving contact but in an unsporting manner should simply be T's.

This is what I keep going back and forth on.

I'm probably looking for the easy way out -- or perhaps an aversion to plumbing, as some would say -- but I like the idea of a T and a double foul, assuming the ball was still in flight during A1's and B1's contact.

Easy dealing: report the T, report both personal fouls, shoot the free throws, resume at the division line.