Administrative Technicals

[Camron Rust]

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

Sure, they may be discovered at different times just like any two random fouls happen at different times. None of that precludes them being discovered at the same time. I never said they were all simultaneous fouls, just that they could be. You said it could never happen. I provided a simple and possible example where it could.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Sure, they may be discovered at different times just like any two random fouls happen at different times. None of that precludes them being discovered at the same time. I never said they were all simultaneous fouls, just that they could be. You said it could never happen. I provided a simple and possible example where it could.

Well I said if you have a case play that suggests otherwise, I will defer to that point of view. But in the OP, this is clearly two different events and did not happen simultaneously. And I do not know of any situation where you would not treat these as different events. And I have yet to find support that suggests you would not shoot FTs in this or any other situation. Again, find something that suggests otherwise and I will go along with your feeling on this.

Peace

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Well I said if you have a case play that suggests otherwise, I will defer to that point of view. But in the OP, this is clearly two different events and did not happen simultaneously. And I do not know of any situation where you would not treat these as different events. And I have yet to find support that suggests you would not shoot FTs in this or any other situation. Again, find something that suggests otherwise and I will go along with your feeling on this.

Peace

JRut - what would you do if you called a double-foul on two guys, where neither one was in the book?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

JRut - what would you do if you called a double-foul on two guys, where neither one was in the book?

Didn't they figure out one of them was not in the book first?

Peace

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Didn't they figure out one of them was not in the book first?

Peace

I don't understand. You just answered a question with a question. What would you do?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

I don't understand. You just answered a question with a question. What would you do?

I just told you what I would do if you were paying attention. This is not a double foul by definition. It is not a foul against opponents and it is not something that happen at the same time. One was discovered before the other. And if you want to ask a third world situation that will not likely happen, because chances are they are discovered before they get that far. And if they are not discovered until the foul, one of them are discovered first and the other second. I would ask, which one did you realize first, then I give a T to them first and the other T second.

And I looked this up and still do not see any support that suggests you can call a double foul for his kind of situation.

Peace

[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).

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

JRut - what would you do if you called a double-foul on two guys, where neither one was in the book?

Double personal followed by simultaneous T. Resume at POI.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Well I said if you have a case play that suggests otherwise, I will defer to that point of view.

3.4.3C

Note that it applies when the admin errors are both discovered before the game. It's an EXAMPLE of admin errors offsetting.

It does not apply to the OP -- I think most agree that both should be penalized in this instance.