False Multiple Foul
 

A1 drives to basket and is fouled by B1 during the act of shooting. While airborn B2 slides over to take a charge but is late and commits a blocking foul. Shot does not go in. Does A1 get 4 throws? Am I reading 4.19.12 correctly?

If you call both fouls, you might be the first person in history to have done so. Good luck in your future officiating endeavors.

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

I'm *guessing* you're a new ref. A couple of vets have given you the strongly worded version -- this dad will give you the kinder and gentler version. Have you ever seen that call made at any level of ball? Right - and the reason you've never seen it is that it just isn't called that way. It's unnecessary 99.99999% of the time it technically happens. I suspect if we worked at it we could construct that unique event where the technically correct call would be valuable to a game (which would probably involve a sufficiently deliberate foul that there could be other ways to address,too), but don't even think of going there until you're a seasoned veteran who is consciously making the call for a specific reason.

The rule exists but as a mentor of mine reminded us when we were new 20+ years ago a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

The day I read that case play in the rule book way back when I had that exact situation come up in a game later the same day. I thought of calling it by the book for maybe a millisecond. After realizing I might end up being the first person on the planet to ever call it that way - and determining where all the exits were in the gym - I reported the initial shooting foul. ;)

Sometimes it's not good to be the smartest man in the room. This would be one of those times!

I have never called it or seen it called. In fact, I didnt know the rule existed. I like to read case plays on the john and this was my am topic :)

This is really funny!

Other night, A1 gets hacked on the arm by B1 while elevating, then in attempt to block shot, B2 also hacks A1. When I came out from endline with my call I simply verbalized 'A1 hit him first'. Game kept on moving.

The smartest person in the room would know this rule but ALSO know it is a bad idea to call it.

Also The Most Interesting Man In The World ...
 

I run into this problem (above) all the time. It's a curse that I have learned to to live with.

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.49575...62464&pid=15.1

Is he wearing a belt :D?

People don't like this case play, so ignore it, even though it is quite clearly written.

People, however, do like 4.19.8c, and while the language is considerably more vague, it must be followed every time.

I have never heard a satisfactory explanation of the difference.

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

Nope, I advocate following them both.