Double Foul (video)

[Rob1968]

2nd Overtime, 3:31 to go, 2 point game, Home leading.

Whistle -- thought: Is it easier to sell/explain the dbl foul, than a foul on White for holding, or a foul on Black for holding off the defender?
With the dbl foul, it just goes to a throw-in. Maybe, a no-call accomplishes the same thing, since the play seemed to progress with no overwhelming need for the whistle.

[Matt S.]

You have to have something here; was just at an NCAA-W camp yesterday, and Jon Levinson was a clinician--said that post play HAS to be cleaned up this season or we're not going to like what could come with rule changes next year...

As for the call itself, get the first foul!

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

2nd Overtime, 3:31 to go, 2 point game, Home leading.

Whistle -- thought: Is it easier to sell/explain the dbl foul, than a foul on White for holding, or a foul on Black for holding off the defender?

I don't know what the time or score have to do with it, but I could be easily sold either way. I like "getting the first" too, but if the second clearly happens quickly, you have to get that one, too.

Is the NCAA double-foul signal the same as NFHS? If so, it would have been less confusing for everyone had the official gotten those fists out quickly. Then, all would have known sooner the fouls were "offsetting."

(Cringe. I swear, someday I'm going to look into spearheading an online rules clinic for announcers.)

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Is the NCAA double-foul signal the same as NFHS?

Yes, the signal is the same.

Originally Posted by bainsey

I don't know what the time or score have to do with it...

Agreed

Originally Posted by bainsey

I like "getting the first" too, but if the second clearly happens quickly, you have to get that one, too.

Not necessarily. If you're positive one happened before the other, call the first one. If the coach who ends up on the short ends asks what happened, explain his/her player committed a foul first.

[Maineac]

Originally Posted by bainsey

If so, it would have been less confusing for everyone had the official gotten those fists out quickly. Then, all would have known sooner the fouls were "offsetting."

It looks to me like she had the DF signal up right after her initial signal, right around :10 on the video. Not sure how much sooner she could have gotten it out there.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Maineac

It looks to me like she had the DF signal up right after her initial signal, right around :10 on the video. Not sure how much sooner she could have gotten it out there.

Good catch. She did it so quickly, I didn't even notice, as my eyes were still on the play. You know the slow, methodical signals we're required to do in these parts.

[BryanV21]

It's like when I was an umpire and we'd roll our eyes whenever the phrase "tie goes to the runner" was said (usually by a fan/parent). It's never a tie. See what came first and make the appropriate call.

I'm not saying you can't have a double foul, but chances are one came before the other. I think a lot of refs use the double foul call as a cop-out, because they weren't paying close enough attention.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

I think a lot of refs use the double foul call as a cop-out, because they weren't paying close enough attention.

Agree, because I've done it myself. I know, in my mind, that something must have happened, that I missed, to lead up to the "double trouble". Just because I missed the first illegal contact, doesn't mean that I'm going to let the players continue to whack each other, so I end up, reluctantly, calling the double foul.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

...
I'm not saying you can't have a double foul, but chances are one came before the other. I think a lot of refs use the double foul call as a cop-out, because they weren't paying close enough attention.

Cop-out implies a lack of intestinal fortitude. I look at it more as not seeing the whole play. I'd rather have a partner call a double foul, instead of letting the 2 players continue to pound on each other.

Originally Posted by bainsey

Iit would have been less confusing for everyone had the official gotten those fists out quickly. Then, all would have known sooner the fouls were "offsetting."

Originally Posted by bainsey

She did it so quickly, I didn't even notice, as my eyes were still on the play.

Are you going to change your tune and say she did the signal too quickly now??

[JetMetFan]

I'm with bainsey on this. When I first saw this play I had the sound down on my CPU. The T put her arms out and back down so fast I had no idea it was a DF. I only figured it out when I saw the ball being put in play via a throw-in.

[Multiple Sports]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

2nd Overtime, 3:31 to go, 2 point game, Home leading.

Whistle -- thought: Is it easier to sell/explain the dbl foul, than a foul on White for holding, or a foul on Black for holding off the defender?
With the dbl foul, it just goes to a throw-in. Maybe, a no-call accomplishes the same thing, since the play seemed to progress with no overwhelming need for the whistle.

With three and change to go in OT, your thought process is a cop out ( with all due respect ), I'm sure there was banging in the post all game long and NOW we are going to call a double.....blow you whistle call the first foul an do the same thing on thhe other end............

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

With three and change to go in OT, your thought process is a cop out ( with all due respect ), I'm sure there was banging in the post all game long and NOW we are going to call a double.....blow you whistle call the first foul an do the same thing on thhe other end............

MS, my comment about the possible thought precess of the official making the call in this video, was an attempt to understand why the whistle seemed (to me) to be so late, and at the moment when the offensive player was reacting to the hold by the defense. To me, at that moment, the only call would have to be a dbl foul.
I agree with you that the first illegal action should be called; and if it were, this video wouldn't be a topic for discussion.

As others have said, it is rare, but sometimes neccessary, to go to the dbl because the second action is enough that it also needs to be penalized.

Actually, from the angle of the Lead, the hold by the defense would have been an easy call. And, if he had called it, this video would not be a topic.

[rockyroad]

Not sure why anyone would think that calling a DF here is a "cop-out"...black 41 (in lovely headgear) displaces and stiff arms white 23 at the same time that white 23 is holding (clamping both arms around the arm of 41)...that would be the very definition of a DF. There was no "first foul" to get on this play.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Not sure why anyone would think that calling a DF here is a "cop-out"...black 42 (in lovely headgear) displaces and stiff arms white 23 at the same time that white 23 is holding (clamping both arms around the arm of 41)...that would be the very definition of a DF. There was no "first foul" to get on this play.

The thing to look at here - and which has been preached during my camps so far - is why did W23 clamp down on B42. Did W23 clamp in response to an illegal act by B42? I would say yes. Right as the throw-in begins, B42 hooks/clamps W23's right arm and that starts the back-and-forth process.