Whoops...
 

Loose ball...players scrambling...tie up...whistle...AP.

A1 pushes B1...R gives T to A1...as R is reporting...A1 goes after B1 yelling that he is going to get him...U1 seperates (but does not blow whistle for a T)...U1 goes to R and tells him to upgrade to second T and ejection...R says "are you sure we want to eject A1?"...U1 is adamant and says "YES"...

They decide to eject A1 and U1 goes to administer the FT's...

U1 looks up and sees 10 fouls on board for team A...U1 forgets that it was an AP that started all this...and puts up 2 fingers for B2 who is at the line...

B2 misses first FT and makes second FT...B2 stays at line to shoot the next FT's (4 more shots, in U1's mind, for the two technical fouls on A1)

B2 makes the next 3 FT's... A Coach says, "why is B2 shooting an extra FT"...

Officials now realize that U1 gave B2 an extra FT and stops U1 from administering another FT...

B2 had 5 shots and made 4...

Whatta ya got?

First two free throws were not merited. Take one point off the board, award one more T free throw, then throw-in at division line.

If I understand this all correctly, why would the first two FTs have been unmerited?

Team B had 4 FTs coming its way for the two Ts. Take the result of the first four FTs, eliminate the result of #5, give Team B the ball at the division line and the AP arrow stays where it was before all the craziness began.

Change it around a bit: A1 goes up for a shot, is fouled and misses the shot and is awarded 2 shots. After the foul, during the dead ball, B1 pushes A2 for a T. The officials erroneously allow A2 to shoot all four FTs. the first 2 go in the second 2 miss. The officials realize their error. Then what do you have?
Here is a hint: I agree with Just another ref.

...and that, my friend, is why I win the refreshment at our next outing! :)

That is exactly how I explained this situation...some disagreed with me, and some (the crew that it happened to) decided they should have taken away the first two shots no matter made or missed...and shot one more FT.

Correctable error. Seems simple enough.;)

Take away A2's first two FT's...allow A1 to shoot two FT's.

We had a thread very similar to this very recently.

That is exactly how the crew handled it...:o

Well, I guess some officials should just spend more time on this forum...

...or in the rule book! ;)

There was disagreement here, too.

There was, but some of those in disagreement ultimately came around.

This is different than the OP since the sequence you describe begins with a shooting foul for one player but another takes his shots, as opposed to the held ball situation. In your scenario of course you wipe the first two since A1 was supposed to take them.

Unless I'm just not computing things properly because I'm really tired, the only fouls in the OP were dead-ball contact Ts which means anyone can take them. B2 got the four FTs he/his team was supposed to get within those first four shots.

They may have but the what-if involving a different shooter reveals the fact that the first shots were the ones awarded for a foul that wasn't committed and are the ones to be corrected.

...yes, but you shoot the FT's in the order they happened.

Since U1 gave two unmerited FT's...you must correct that and take them away...then give one more FT for the 4th Technical FT that has not been shot yet.

I'm tired also...;)

Okay. I wasn't processing the whole "U1 thought..." part of the equation. The joys of hindsight since I knew from reading the OP that there wasn't a foul at the start of the whole mess.

This is correct per a couple of past NFHS rulings.

Which are?

There should have been 4 free throws awarded to Team B. Two for each Technical Foul. The first FT was missed, then the next three were made. That should have been the end of the FT's. Therefore 3 made free throws should be scored.

The extra free throw is cancelled and Team B gets a division line throw in. (Rule 2-10-1b)

I've got a question......

Did the crew get together after the R was done at the table and before U1 began administering the FT's to review as a crew the sequence of events... starting with the held ball, number of shots, the throw-in to follow the FT's, and the current status of the AP arrow?

I wasn't there...but, I do not believe the crew got together before U1 administered the FT's. (That isn't so out of the ordinary either)

Nevada...do you have those NFHS rulings available to see? If so...I guess I owe the refreshments. :o

chapmaja...I realize Rule 2-10-1b is about awarding "unmerited free throw"...
our discussion is if the unmerited FT was at the start of the sequence or at the end of the sequence of FT's.

Especially since U1 admitted he gave the 1st 2 FT's because he thought they were in the double bonus and forgot the AP was in play.

Camron? Adam? ...any help here?

For some reason when I first read this I thought that U1 had designated B2 as the shooter, but apparently that is not the case, and B1 is the one who was pushed. But while having the wrong shooter at the line is a problem, it happens all the time and is a separate problem from the issue at hand.

But I still stick with my original assessment. U1 says that he awarded bonus free throws, and these were not merited.

But for those who say that "a free throw is a free throw" and wipe out the last one, this is not unreasonable and I can live with it.

Pending Nevada (or someone else) posting the rulings from the Fed:

First, I have a question, was the official awarding the first two free throws as bonus free throws? If so, it seems the first two were erroneous. If not, then the last one was erroneous.

Since B2 was not the fouled player, it's a pretty hard sell to consider the first two erroneous. That would make it a "wrong player incorrectly being awarded two unmerited free throws" or something similarly redundant. If he had instructed B1 to shoot those first two free throws, it would obviously be the first two shots that were to be cancelled. I'm inclined to go that route if that was the thinking for the administering official.

That said, since B obviously had their best (or chosen) shooter on the line for all 5, I'm equally comfortable with declaring the first four valid.

I'm honestly not sure there's a right answer here short of a very clear interpretation from NFHS (or your state).

Final question: Why was the R questioning the decision to toss the kid?

Asked and answered.

Computer is messed up...short answer (before it screws up again)...R did not like the fact that U1 didn't whistle and show a T...R thought it would look bad to eject and thought one Twould be sufficient.