What do you think..........

bob jenkins

swkansasref33 wrote
Wouldn't they be false double-fouls though?
Case Book Pg. 80 Rule 10.3.8

There is a false double foul, the second half of which is a double foul (T's on both A2 and B2 for "exchanging greetings"). How does that change the ruling?

swkansasref33

Jurassic Referee wrote
Um, yeah....:confused:

It's a false double foul consisting of a common foul called on a team A player followed by a double technical foul on a player from each team. As such, it gets handled the exact way that's been posted so far.

I must be missing the point that you're trying to make. Could you clarify?

Maybe the difference in the situation we went over is that they were 2 FLAGRANT T's, and not just two technicals. Here is the exact situation they gave us in our Meeting.

Team A #42 is fouled in b/c (A is in double bonus). Team B #12 who committed the foul, shoves fouled player from Team A #43. A Flagrant T is called on B #12, and B #12 is ejected. Before the fouls are reported, Team A #32 (not player who was fouled) shoves disqualified B #12. A Flagrant T is called, and A #32 is also ejected.

Answer-
The situation is a false double-foul (the second of which occurs befoer the clock is started following the first). And since a false double foul carries its own penalty-we would shoot two free throws fore each team and then Team B would take the ball out at the divison line

So you would: (administer penalties in order the fouls occured)
Shoot personal foul FT by A #42
Shoot Technical Foul FT by Team A
Shoot Technical Foul FT by Team B
Take the ball out at the division line by Team B

Jurassic Referee

swkansasref33 wrote
Maybe the difference in the situation we went over is that they were 2 FLAGRANT T's, and not just two technicals. Here is the exact situation they gave us in our Meeting.

Team A #42 is fouled in b/c (A is in double bonus). Team B #12 who committed the foul, shoves fouled player from Team A #43. A Flagrant T is called on B #12, and B #12 is ejected. Before the fouls are reported, Team A #32 (not player who was fouled) shoves disqualified B #12. A Flagrant T is called, and A #32 is also ejected.

Answer-
The situation is a false double-foul (the second of which occurs befoer the clock is started following the first). And since a false double foul carries its own penalty-we would shoot two free throws fore each team and then Team B would take the ball out at the divison line

So you would: (administer penalties in order the fouls occured)
Shoot personal foul FT by A #42
Shoot Technical Foul FT by Team A
Shoot Technical Foul FT by Team B
Take the ball out at the division line by Team B

Um, yeah.......:confused:

That's a false double foul but it's a different situation entirely. You handle it exactly the same way as you handle the situation in the original post of this thread..i.e. you penalize each foul in the order that they occur. In your case you've got a foul followed by a false double foul. In the OP there is just a false double foul. The difference is that in your situation, the official ruled that that the technical fouls by B12 and A32 weren't committed at approximately the same time and thus didn't meet the definition of a double foul. Iow, apples and oranges from the original situation posted.

I still fail to see what point you're trying to make.

swkansasref33

How is the situation different? In his case, you have a rebounding foul, then two technicals. I don't see the difference, other than the Flagrant T's. Can you clarify the difference for me please?

Jurassic Referee

swkansasref33 wrote
How is the situation different? In his case, you have a rebounding foul, then two technicals. I don't see the difference, other than the Flagrant T's. Can you clarify the difference for me please?

In the case that you posted, the official ruled that the flagrant technical fouls did NOT occur at the same time. They were different plays iow. They were sequential, not together. If he hadda ruled that they occurred at approximately the same time, then they would have been a double technical foul as per NFHS rule 4-19-8(b). He didn't rule that the technical fouls occurred at the same time, so they fall under NFHS rule 4-19-9 instead.

The situation that you posted is completely different than the original post of this thread, and as such is covered by a different rule.

bob jenkins

swkansasref33 wrote
Maybe the difference in the situation we went over is that they were 2 FLAGRANT T's, and not just two technicals. Here is the exact situation they gave us in our Meeting.

Team A #42 is fouled in b/c (A is in double bonus). Team B #12 who committed the foul, shoves fouled player from Team A #43. A Flagrant T is called on B #12, and B #12 is ejected. Before the fouls are reported, Team A #32 (not player who was fouled) shoves disqualified B #12. A Flagrant T is called, and A #32 is also ejected.

It has nothing to do with the fouls being flagrant. Compare your play (above) to a very similar play:

Team A #42 is fouled in b/c (A is in double bonus). Team B #12 who committed the foul, shoves fouled player from Team A #43. At the same time A43 shoves B12 back. A Flagrant T is called on B #12 and on A43 and both players are ejected.

Ruling:

No FTs are shot for the double T.

A42 shoots two FTs with players on the line and the ball remains in play after the second FT.

See the difference?

johnSandlin

Jurassic Referee,

No disrespect intended, but my supervisor is bar none the best rules based official that I know of be it high school rules or college rules. I trust his knowledge completely.

Jurassic Referee

johnSandlin wrote
Jurassic Referee,

No disrespect intended, but my supervisor is bar none the best rules based official that I know of be it high school rules or college rules. I trust his knowledge completely.

John, if your supervisor is the best rules based official in your area, then you have a major, major problem, rules-wise imo.

Your supervisor is unequivocally and completely wrong, by the very explicit rules already cited. Your supervisor would be wise to send this play into the NFHS office and get their ruling on it. Your supervisor would also be wise to send this play into the NCAA office and get their ruling on it also. As it stands right now, your supervisor has the unique distinction of being totally and completely wrong in two different rulesets. And, unfortunately, his followers are drinking the koolaid.

johnSandlin

J. Referee,

Thank you for your thoughts. I still disagree, but I do appreciate your thoughts and opinions concerning my original post.

Jurassic Referee

johnSandlin wrote
J. Referee,

Thank you for your thoughts. I still disagree, but I do appreciate your thoughts and opinions concerning my original post.

John, quite seriously, I think that you would be wise in this case to check out another source on this one other than the supervisor that you mentioned. Disregard me, but....some of the other officials in this thread who also disagreed with your supervisor are very competent college officials and are also extremely reliable sources when it comes to rules interpretations. I'd sure stop and think myself if they collectively told me that I had a ruling wrong on something.

Just saying.....

Adam

johnSandlin wrote
At the time of this game, I agreed with your response 100%. But after the discussion with my supervisor, who is also an active college womens official, we did do this wrong.

The double foul happened during dead ball time. Where we made the mistake(s) was (1) totally never thought about the fact that this happened on a dead ball. (2) Cannot have a double personal foul during a dead ball.

It should have been a double T. Shoot bonus FT's with the lane cleared for the original live ball foul during the rebounding action. Use the AP arrow for the double T after the FT's for the original foul at the POI.

The administration of a double T and a double personal are the same. POI.

Case play 4.19.8D deals with a double personal during a free throw. POI, shoot the free throw with everyone lined up.

Case play 4.19.8A (b) deals with a double T (two players fouling each other during a dead ball.) POI is defined the same in either case.

Rule 4-36 clearly states that POI is identical for both situations. Line them up and shoot. No longer do we go to the arrow for double Ts.

What logic is your supervisor using to have different POI for double personals as opposed to double technicals?

« Previous Page