False Double Foul?

[Toren]

So last night I had a varsity boys game, 2 man mechanics.

Player A1 gets the ball stolen by team B, I'm the L now the new T. As I'm running I have eyes and ears on A1 since he's been a bit vocal in this game. Sure enough I hear some cuss words directed at player B1. I signal for a T. As I do that, a shot is up in the air that misses. As the shot is in the air B1 moves in for a rebound and pushes A1 in the back, A1 turns around and pushes B1 back.

So I now have a T for unsporting behavior, followed by a dead ball double technical.

Now I ask myself a couple of things: first, if A1 wouldn't have retaliated with a push, I probably wouldn't have had anything on B1. The fact that A1 retaliated with a push, lead me to penalize both players with a double T? I certainly could not let the retaliation push go unpenalized, it was too egregious.

As I thought about it later, I needed to also penalize the push regardless, because it could have discounted the basket from scoring, had it scored. But then am I left with a T, common foul, T? as opposed to what we had, T, double T.

Secondly, after having player A1 removed from the game, we penalized with 2 free throws for team B because of the original T and the ball at half court opposite the table.

Thoughts on this play?

One last thing, if the ball in flight had gone in, if I had penalized with T, common foul, T, then the basket doesn't count, but we have 4 free throws plus the ball OOB? If I had penalized with T, double T, then the basket counts and we shoot 2 free throws plus the ball OOB?

Sorry for the long story.

[tref]

Nothing wrong with holding the whistle for the 1st T on the defensive player until the play ends.

Originally Posted by Toren

One last thing, if the ball in flight had gone in, if I had penalized with T, common foul, T, then the basket doesn't count...

No?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Toren

...As the shot is in the air B1 moves in for a rebound and pushes A1 in the back, A1 turns around and pushes B1 back.

... I needed to also penalize the push regardless, because it could have discounted the basket from scoring, had it scored. ....

If the ball is in flight the only thing that would discount a basket would be a violation against Team A (swinging elbows; unauthorized leaving of the court).

[Toren]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

If the ball is in flight the only thing that would discount a basket would be a violation against Team A (swinging elbows; unauthorized leaving of the court).

I got myself confused with player control during flight of the ball. Damn it.

Well I guess that makes the way I adjudicated probably the best way. T then double T.

[tref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

If the ball is in flight the only thing that would discount a basket would be a violation against Team A (swinging elbows; unauthorized leaving of the court).

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

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by tref

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

In this case though the foul is by Team A. Nevermind, the team designations are switched.

I still think an immediate whistle is appropriate here. Treating it like any other foul by Team B does not take away Team A's chance at a basket.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by tref

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

I had removed that from the equation based on his description of the play.

[tref]

Originally Posted by Welpe

In this case though the foul is by Team A. Nevermind, the team designations are switched.

I still think an immediate whistle is appropriate here. Treating it like any other foul by Team B does not take away Team A's chance at a basket.

Calling a technical foul on the defense while a shot is in flight or when a scoring opportunity is immenent makes us think a bit more about how to resume play.
Allowing the play to finish & then sticking the defense gives us less to think about.

What if Toren assessed the T on the defender just before the shooter began his habitual shooting motion on a 3? You know they generally release the shot anyway & of course, this time it goes in.
Wouldn't it had hurt the defense more if we allow the 3 to get off, now we can count the basket, stick knucklehead & give the offense 2 FTs plus the ball. Potential 8 point play as opposed to a potential 5 point play, just by being patient.

That's just my opinion. I believe there's a caseplay on witholding the whistle for Ts on the defense as well.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I had removed that from the equation based on his description of the play.

True, just wanted to make sure any newbies that read this will know the 2 violations (as you noted) & the type of foul that would cancel a try in flight.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by tref

What if Toren assessed the T on the defender just before the shooter began his habitual shooting motion on a 3?

That would be a different play from the one we're discussing.

[tref]

Originally Posted by Welpe

That would be a different play from the one we're discussing.

Most definitely, I think you're missing my point though.

If Toren has eyes & ears on knucklehead in a 2 person system, he probably has no idea of when the shooter gathered the ball. If the other official looks at Toren once he blew his whistle, he probably has no idea of the gather. Now the shot goes in & the crew is

Also, what if he assessed the T while an outlet pass was made for a dunk?

I respect your stance, but I'm going to practice holding my whistle on defensive Ts when there is a chance for the offense to score.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by tref

Most definitely, I think you're missing my point though.

No, I understand fully what you're saying, you're just talking about other scenarios that I was not addressing.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by tref

...
I respect your stance, but I'm going to practice holding my whistle on defensive Ts when there is a chance for the offense to score.

Made that mistake twice. Once killing a fast break in a BV game. The other time in camp when a shot was going up and my P's were no help in providing information in regards to my whistle and the shot. We ended up wiping off a basket that should have counted.

[tref]

Originally Posted by Welpe

No, I understand fully what you're saying, you're just talking about other scenarios that I was not addressing.

Actually I'm talking about 10.4.1 Situation E. It clearly spells out when to assess the T for the defense as well as the offense when a scoring opportunity is imminent.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Made that mistake twice. Once killing a fast break in a BV game. The other time in camp when a shot was going up and my P's were no help in providing information in regards to my whistle and the shot. We ended up wiping off a basket that should have counted.

Must've happened when you first got into the craft!

Just like a 3 second call, we better know where the ball is when calling a T on the defense while the ball is live.
I've had a few experiences with calling 3 seconds & the ball is going the other way.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Toren

So last night I had a varsity boys game, 2 man mechanics.

Player A1 gets the ball stolen by team B, I'm the L now the new T. As I'm running I have eyes and ears on A1 since he's been a bit vocal in this game. Sure enough I hear some cuss words directed at player B1. I signal for a T. As I do that, a shot is up in the air that misses. As the shot is in the air B1 moves in for a rebound and pushes A1 in the back, A1 turns around and pushes B1 back.

So I now have a T for unsporting behavior, followed by a dead ball double technical.

Thoughts on this play?

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.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by tref

...
Must've happened when you first got into the craft!
....

Wish I could take that out

They were both a few years ago, and I've conditioned myself now, but I was experienced enough back then, just let my emotions take over and reacted without thought.