False Multiple Foul

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You are reading it correctly. Do not call this. I do not care what the interpretation says, do not call this. Not unless you want to have to explain to a coach why you called one foul that likely caused the other. You probably would have to T a coach too. Good luck with that.

Peace

Originally Posted by JRutledge

People do not think it is logical. It is not so much that it is clear, but someone if fouled to many does not make since you would have to charge them with a separate foul. And I cannot think of a situation where a fouled player is not altered in such a way that they would be responsible for another foul either. Yes the play is clear, but it does not make real world sense IMO.

Peace

Did you read the OP or the title to this thread?
This is not a double foul involving a hit on the arm followed by a charge, rather it is followed by a blocking foul. Thus it is a multiple. How could the first foul logically cause the second foul. You immediately defaulted to the double foul argument when it doesn't apply.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I am jumping into the thread late but I would like to comment on NFHS CB Play 4.19.12 which is the exact play in the OP.

1) This play does happen from time to time (and in 43 years for officiating I have seen this type of contact happen; and it is not as uncommon as some people would like to believe. But is it called as in the CB Play? The answer no. I cannot ever (for the J. Dallas Shirley fans, did you notice how I avoided using the word "never", ) seeing a FMF called in this situation.

2) BUT!! There is one time that it could be called as in the CB Play but the contact is extremely rare. If the second PF is an "undercut" then both fouls have to be charged and penalized.

I cannot remember the last time I have heard anybody on this Forum talk about an "undercut" foul. For those to do not know what such a foul is, I will describe it. It is when a defender slides into the path of an airborne player but is not facing him in an attempt to take a charge (which would be a Common Foul) but has his back to the airborne player such that when the airborne players legs hits the defender's back the defender bend forward and causes the airborne play to rotate forward about his center of mass and land more or less on his hands and knees. The resulting landing can cause broken wrists and more. It is at the least an Intentional PF and can very easily be a Flagrant PF.

If were were revise CB Play 4.19.12 to change B2's foul to be an undercut, that I would have no problem with both fouls being charged and penalized because B2's foul is at the least an IPF and very easily a FPF.

Fortunately for the game of basketball I have not seen "undercut" foul in close to 30 years and the last time I saw one I ruled it FPF.

MTD, Sr.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I am jumping into the thread late but I would like to comment on NFHS CB Play 4.19.12 which is the exact play in the OP.

...

I could see calling an FMF is the 2nd foul were excessive contact. But it's never happened to me yet.

[Rich]

I had something like this earlier this week:

A1 drives, B1 whacks him on the arm as he starts his shooting motion, I call the foul, and then A1 and B2 have a block/charge collision.

I don't think anyone in the gym expected me to come out with two fouls on the play. And I didn't.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I could see calling an FMF is the 2nd foul were excessive contact. But it's never happened to me yet.

Just to be clear, the plays being talked about above are NOT False Multiple Fouls but Multiple Fouls.

The calling of False Multiple Fouls is actually rather common (relative to real multiple fouls or double fouls).

Neither "false" foul is a single call with two fouls involved.

A false multiple, like a false double, usually occurs when there is one foul called and then, before the clock starts again after the first foul (on the subsequent throwin or rebound of a FT for the original foul), a second foul called. Depending on who fouls who, that is a false multiple or false double because they will have occurred with the same time on the clock.

We don't actually call false multiple/double fouls, ever. We call two independent fouls that happen to be false multiple/double fouls due to the nature of the timing.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Just to be clear, the plays being talked about above are NOT False Multiple Fouls but Multiple Fouls.

The calling of False Multiple Fouls is actually rather common (relative to real multiple fouls or double fouls).

Neither "false" foul is a single call with two fouls involved.

....

Yep, my bad. I was following Jets acronym. I was even thinking about the fact that my situation wasn't a "false" while typing it.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I could see calling an FMF is the 2nd foul were excessive contact. But it's never happened to me yet.

Very good point. I hate to say it, but if the 2nd foul is excessive, I think we're obliged to call a FMF. Having said that, I've never seen this in my career.

But then wouldn't this be 3 foul shots? 1 for the 1st foul, and 2 for the 2nd? Plus possession.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Very good point. I hate to say it, but if the 2nd foul is excessive, I think we're obliged to call a FMF. Having said that, I've never seen this in my career.

But then wouldn't this be 3 foul shots? 1 for the 1st foul, and 2 for the 2nd? Plus possession.

If the 2nd foul it excessive, I'm probably only calling that one. Having a patient whistle (even whistles across the crew) allows that to occur.