Dead Ball Losing Focus
 

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/A58d1YRTEfw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I don't feel like there (is/should be) too much controversy in this clip. I think there are some great teaching points from this clip:

1.) Dead ball officiating has to be on point...even if the game in hand is not close. While the lead and the center should have had this....the center leaves early...and the lead loses focuses for a second. And it costs him.

2.) If you are the center official who has a double whistle here...you can't be in too much of a hurry after the call...even if you feel the lead should have it.

3.) If any of the officials has information on a play like this, one should speak up immediately...and not take whatever they have into the locker room...where that information will be of no use to the crew.

The C has a call on the initial play and heads to report. A little quick? Maybe. The lead is obviously still observing because he gets the black team player for throwing the ball at the white team player. The trail is walking over as the clip cuts out. To me what should happen next is they need to get together and talk it through. Obviously they have the original foul and then at least one T and possibly two after discussion if they conclude white team player threw the ball at the black team player first, which it appears he did. Would have liked to have seen the entire clip play out.

I had the same basic call in a game over a Christmas Tournament this year.

Did you call a double T or one after the other?

Peace

I'd lean toward false double T (two separate distinct actions with a (small) bit of time between them), but I'd be willing to get other opinions.

I would penalize as a double-T as the acts occur at approximately the same time and involve only two opponents.

Still not sure what I think of the football officiating shirts.

When I called this in December, that is what our discussion was about. I clearly had a T on both players, but wanted to originally make it two separate fouls (not a double foul). I was talked into making it a double foul and the tournament director felt we did the right thing (he is also an official and an Association President).

Peace

I agree with your original assessment of your play and the video, that this is a FDF, but when the rules were modified to define a fight as when one player commits an IF or FF (my interpretation) that causes his opponent to retaliate, the fouls can be defined as a fight and both fouls become Fighting Fouls by definition and they cancel each other out and we go to the AP Arrow.

Full disclosure requires me to admit that I am not the biggest supporter of the Fight Rule. I know an IPF, FPF, ITF, and FTF when I see one and know how to penalize them. But I do like the concept of canceling our certain opposing TFs.

MTD, Sr.

MTD,
If two opponents exchange verbal insults do you administer as a FDF or a DF?

DTF but not Fighting Fouls.

MTD, Sr.

For those who are wondering about Nevada's question and my answer.

Nevada and I know that verbal insults run the gamut from a two opponents exchanging non-FTFs for Unsportsmanlike Conduct to two opponents exchanging FTFs for Unsportsmanlike Conduct. This calls for the type of judgment for which we are paid the big "bucks".

MTD, Sr.

Then why is tossing the ball back and forth any different?

I don't understand your question. Please give me an example.

I agree that both players in the video committed TFs. The question is: Are these two separate fouls a FDF or do we have Fighting Fouls which would have them offset each other and both players being Disqualified. If one does not want the incident in the video to be a FDF then one has to rule the fouls as part of a Fighting Foul.

MTD, Sr.

No, the question is are the technical fouls in the video (two players throwing the ball at each other) penalized as a false double foul with FTs attempted in order of occurrence or do they constitute a double foul with no FTs resulting.

To create an analogous situation, I replaced the tossing of the ball in the video with verbal insults being exchanged. So the sequence would be: A1 is fouled by B1. A1 says something unsporting to B1 and B1 replies with an unsporting remark. Are you going to shoot two FTs or six?

I've never actually considered a scenario where you shoot 2-2-2 or more and flip flop ends of the court between each set. It's too bad there isn't a provision that would allow you to shoot them all at one end and then all at the other, provided you shoot the last set on the end of the team who will ultimately inbound the ball. While that's certainly not a high priority provision, if this scenario did occur, it would just look sort of weird going back-and-forth.

MTD, it almost seems like you're trying to say that only fighting fouls can offset. I know you know that's not true, but that's how I'm reading the argument.

Why can you not have a normal (i.e. non-flagrant) double technical here? The acts occurred at approximately the same time and involved the same two opponents.

On another note, the definition of fighting involves "combative acts" or instigation by an unsporting act that causes a person to retaliate by fighting (i.e. using combative acts). I don't believe the throwing of basketballs as seen in the video constitute combative acts. If I throw a ball in your face when you're two feet away, that might be different. But as it is here, that's not the case. Both throws aren't combative, and the first does not cause the other person to attack the instigator. So no FTFs for fighting.

My opinion: This is a false double foul. First part is the personal foul, and second part is the DTF. Since DTF is POI, I believe you just continue as normal from the two FTs for the personal foul with players in the lane.