Administrative Technicals

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

That's why i didn't understand. No - I'm talking about what you would do if you called a double-foul on two guys that neither happened to be in the book (i.e., a situation dif from OP).

Huh? Not only did I answer your question, but you should have figured out that by the question I asked you. One of the times a player is not in the book was discovered first. I would think that is not hard to understand. But you know what they say when you assume? Oh well.

Peace

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Huh? Not only did I answer your question, but you should have figured out that by the question I asked you. One of the times a player is not in the book was discovered first. I would think that is not hard to understand. But you know what they say when you assume? Oh well.

Peace

You do know what a double foul is, right? Let's say for example, A3 and B3 early in the game are pulling and grabbing each other, and you blow the whistle, and issue a foul to each. The table tells you that neither are in the book. What would you do? If anyone else reading this knows what he would do because it's obvious if you've been paying attention - then please tell me. Thanks.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

You do know what a double foul is, right? Let's say for example, A3 and B3 early in the game are pulling and grabbing each other, and you blow the whistle, and issue a foul to each. The table tells you that neither are in the book. What would you do? If anyone else reading this knows what he would do because it's obvious if you've been paying attention - then please tell me. Thanks.

You are right I have no idea what a double foul is. Yep, no idea.

I WOULD PENALIZE THE T OF THE TEAM THAT WAS DISCOVERED FIRST and then PENALIZE THE SECOND DISCOVERY SECOND (You know the order in which they took place, THEN GIVE THE BALL AT HALF COURT TO THE SECOND TEAM OFFENDED. THAT WOULD BE THE POINT OF INTERRUPTION AFTER THE DOUBLE FOUL!!!!

Does that answer your question?

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

Let's say for example, A3 and B3 early in the game are pulling and grabbing each other, and you blow the whistle, and issue a foul to each. The table tells you that neither are in the book. What would you do? If anyone else reading this knows what he would do because it's obvious if you've been paying attention - then please tell me. Thanks.

First of all, this is a significant part of what we do here, we debate things that will never happen...............just in case they do.

Even if this did happen, one would probably be discovered slightly before the other:

BUZZ A1 is not in the book. Okay, here's what we'll do.........

BUZZ B1 is not in the book, either. Okay, you know what? Write both of them in and let's play on.


If this is not a 2-3, what is?

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You are right I have no idea what a double foul is. Yep, no idea.

I WOULD PENALIZE THE T OF THE TEAM THAT WAS DISCOVERED FIRST and then PENALIZE THE SECOND DISCOVERY SECOND (You know the order in which they took place, THEN GIVE THE BALL AT HALF COURT TO THE SECOND TEAM OFFENDED. THAT WOULD BE THE POINT OF INTERRUPTION AFTER THE DOUBLE FOUL!!!!

Does that answer your question?

Peace

Yes. Was that so hard? If two guys were simultaneously pulling and grabbing each other, such that you call a double foul, I'm glad to hear you are always able to tell who grabbed and pulled first.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

Yes. Was that so hard? If two guys were simultaneously pulling and grabbing each other, such that you call a double foul, I'm glad to hear you are always able to tell who grabbed and pulled first.

I thought it was self explanatory if you know that I feel you cannot have a double foul on these situation (and there is no support anyone can show me or I can find). Maybe you do not understand the rules or definitions that apply. If it is not a double foul, then you administer Ts in the order of their occurrence. That is pretty basic stuff man.

BTW, I was taught to call the first foul, not to get in a habit of calling double fouls on players. It has been said at camps to be a cop out. Call the first foul and the second foul does not happen. You know the similar reason you see hardly anyone advocate calling a multiple foul as one took place first.

Peace

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I thought it was self explanatory if you know that I feel you cannot have a double foul on these situation (and there is no support anyone can show me or I can find). Maybe you do not understand the rules or definitions that apply. If it is not a double foul, then you administer Ts in the order of their occurrence. That is pretty basic stuff man.

BTW, I was taught to call the first foul, not to get in a habit of calling double fouls on players. It has been said at camps to be a cop out. Call the first foul and the second foul does not happen. You know the similar reason you see hardly anyone advocate calling a multiple foul as one took place first.

Peace

I am fully aware of the basic stuff and administering T's in order of occurrence. I never mentioned that, never asked a question about that, not sure why you keep bringing it up. I'm talking about double "personal" fouls.

I agree the double foul can sometimes be a cop out, but sometimes an official (not you) missed the first contact. And, although you've never called one, and never will, I've seen other officials call them. I was wondering what should happen if neither of the offenders were in the book in this situation. I mistakenly thought you may have called one of those, or in the future call one and, wanted to know how you'd handle it.

Because, in that case, it seems whichever team and number happens to be given to the table last, gets screwed. And, that doesn't seem fair.

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by just another ref

First of all, this is a significant part of what we do here, we debate things that will never happen...............just in case they do.

Even if this did happen, one would probably be discovered slightly before the other:

BUZZ A1 is not in the book. Okay, here's what we'll do.........

BUZZ B1 is not in the book, either. Okay, you know what? Write both of them in and let's play on.


If this is not a 2-3, what is?

In my opinion, this sounds like the logical thing to do.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

I am fully aware of the basic stuff and administering T's in order of occurrence. I never mentioned that, never asked a question about that, not sure why you keep bringing it up. I'm talking about double "personal" fouls.

OK, but isn't this topic about Administrative Technicals? If you want to start a topic about double fouls, then you might want to make that clearer.

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

I agree the double foul can sometimes be a cop out, but sometimes an official (not you) missed the first contact. And, although you've never called one, and never will, I've seen other officials call them. I was wondering what should happen if neither of the offenders were in the book in this situation. I mistakenly thought you may have called one of those, or in the future call one and, wanted to know how you'd handle it.

If you miss the first contact, why not just call the "second" contact first? And I have called a double foul, but was taught not to call them some time ago. I was actually at a camp before John Adams was the Supervisor for the NCAA to not call double fouls. He would say, "If you miss the first contact, miss the second contact and call the third contact." I also teach officials in camps not to call double fouls and get the first contact and call that instead of a double foul. Usually the second contact is a result of us not calling what first happen. And usually since you see a lot of double fouls called on post play, the NCAA for example usually illustrates how the first contact should be called and you would not have a second foul.

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

Because, in that case, it seems whichever team and number happens to be given to the table last, gets screwed. And, that doesn't seem fair.

Life is not fair and the rules are not always "fair." And like JAR stated this is very rare when you consider the chances are the minute a player comes into the game, it would be discovered that player was not in the book by someone (opponents often keep their own book as well). I doubt seriously that someone would not be screaming that someone was not in the book. But if it falls through the cracks, then I would do what I said before. If the rules makers want to make this situation easier, they can change the rule or give and interpretation to suggest exactly how they want this to be administered. Since they have not done that at this time and I doubt that will happen soon, it will be up to the officials that are on the game in question.

Peace

[Coach Bill]

[QUOTE=JRutledge;914679]OK, but isn't this topic about Administrative Technicals? If you want to start a topic about double fouls, then you might want to make that clearer.

You mean like when i wrote this about 5 posts ago:

"I'm talking about what you would do if you called a double-foul on two guys that neither happened to be in the book (i.e., a situation dif from OP)."

And, no, I don't want to start a topic on double fouls. It was relevant to the thread because guys were coming up with scenarios where Administrative T's were simultaneous. And, I thought this qualified. Double foul on two separate offenders both aren't in the book. Which I think, is an Admin. T on both teams at the same time. I know, rare. I know probably never happen. But, just in case, was wondering what do you do? I like JAR's answer - put em in, and play on. Anything else, seems like someone is gaining an advantage not intended by the rules.

[Camron Rust]

You said...

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not see how an administrative T can ever be a double foul by definition. So you administer this fouls in the order in which they took place.

Peace

So, I provide a few basic examples of how "can never happen" (not a ruling on the OP) is false lest anyone actually believe the erroneous statement.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Not double, but simultaneous....

Neither team provides their rosters/starters by the 10 minute mark?

At some moment in the game, the table tells you that neither A1 nor B1, both in the game, is in the book.

But then you twist it back to the OP again like you so often do.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Well then show that is the intention by the rules makers an show a situation that is how this should be adjudicated. Each of these situations could be realistically found out at different times, so I am not sure how you make that a simultaneous foul of some kind when these are only fouls when discovered. We are already about to shoot FTs in one and then we later find out there is a T in another situation. There is clearly a delay and that is not either at the same time against opponents or simultaneous which you are suggesting.

Peace

Will you make up your mind about whether you're talking about the OP or something that can never happen? Or do you enjoy changing the topic back and forth just for kicks?

[JRutledge]

Camron,

I made it very clear that the thing that can never happen is the double foul on an administrative technical foul based off of a book technical. There is no rules support that you have shown me to contradict that statement. I did not say you could never possibly have two different players from two different teams not be in the book. I just do not believe that you can call that a double foul and go to the POI as a way to administer the situation. If that is hard to understand than I guess that is your issue. Maybe that is what they do at the NCAAW level, but not the rules set I am using. I would even have to look up to see if even at the NCAAM level this is the way to handle such a situation. And if you do a lot of things you can prevent all this by having coaches check what they submitted.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

"I'm talking about what you would do if you called a double-foul on two guys that neither happened to be in the book (i.e., a situation dif from OP)."

I guess I assumed that you were talking about the topic related to Administrative Ts and it appears I was not alone in that assumption as you were given an answer by someone else related to your question and an Administrative T.

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

And, no, I don't want to start a topic on double fouls. It was relevant to the thread because guys were coming up with scenarios where Administrative T's were simultaneous. And, I thought this qualified. Double foul on two separate offenders both aren't in the book. Which I think, is an Admin. T on both teams at the same time. I know, rare. I know probably never happen. But, just in case, was wondering what do you do? I like JAR's answer - put em in, and play on. Anything else, seems like someone is gaining an advantage not intended by the rules.

I did not see many guys coming up with different scenarios. And only one person talked about them being simultaneous.

Since this seems to be hard for you, here is the definition of a double foul in Rule 4-19-8a: "A double personal foul is a situation in which two opponents commits personal fouls against each other at approximately the same time."

A blarge is a double foul (can be avoided) and some might consider a situation with a fight as a double foul.

And you can like JAR's position, but that does not make it right or the way the rule should be handled. If a player is not in the book, it is a technical foul. And I know if I was called to the carpet, I would not want to use that usage of 2-3 to apply here. If you put the players in the game and not give a T, you are giving someone an advantage as well or you certainly might have a coach that feels they are disadvantaged. Again that is just an opinion, but one I am comfortable with.

Peace

[just another ref]

I think everyone agrees that double foul would not apply here. But rather look at the definition of simultaneous foul. It contains the word approximately. Let's look at a couple of things that actually might happen. Both teams fail to submit their rosters on time, or both leave a player off or change a starter for some reason. As far as I'm concerned, the whole 10 minutes before the start of the game would qualify as "approximately the same time."

Play on.

Just reread the OP. That is also "approximately the same time" in my book.

[SuperXYZ]

play on sounds good. no clear cut on that ruling. but if im not mistaking the players have to check in at the table before coming in to the game and should be found out there but if not, the chances of two players getting into the game to be in the double foul situation then you need a new book keeper. lol