+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: How to resolve multiple calls

  1. #1

    How to resolve multiple calls

    Hi rules people,

    I'm the thrower, with the stall around 7. I pivot, contact the mark, and call a foul. Then I attempt a throw which falls incomplete, but the marker contacts my hand and I call a second foul. The marker contests the first foul but not the second.

    Clearly the disc is still mine, but does the stall come in at 1 or 6? I can see arguments both ways:
    - Stall 1: It seems reasonable that if the same team commits two infractions, you should give the infracted team the choice of which call takes precedence. In this case, I'd choose the uncontested foul.
    - Stall 6: If the second foul hadn't occurred and the pass was complete, I'd get the disc back at stall 6 (since the first foul was before the throwing motion). It seems strange that drawing a foul would be a better outcome than completing the pass.

    In general, the rules don't give much guidance when two calls happen before play stops (unless the calls are from opposite teams on the same "play" -- and I'm not even sure I know what "play" means in this context). Do you have any clarifications, or should we just wing it when these situations come up?

    Thanks,
    - Nate

  2. #2
    This isn't covered explicitly by the rules language, I don't think, but extending the basic logic a bit I'd say Stall 6. The reason the continuation rule is written the way it is for throws beginning after a thrower's foul call is so that the offense cannot gain anything - the thrower should know to stop playing once he has made the call. Thus, it shouldn't gain 5 seconds in the stall count.

    Alternatively, the resolution to most uncontested foul situations roughly follows the answer to the question, "What would have happened had the foul not occurred?" The *best* case scenario for the offense in the case where the 2nd foul does not occur would be coming back at stall 6. So that's probably the right answer.

  3. #3
    Just curious. after calling the first foul, why attempt the throw? Don't the rules say to bring it back if the thrower calls a foul before the throw? Or are you playing with the new "contact" rules?

  4. #4
    Because I'm an idiot

    Or maybe because when you think to yourself "pivot and throw" it's hard to abort that plan in the half second between the foul and the throw.

  5. #5
    One week bump ... anyone official want to comment?

    Thanks,
    - Nate

  6. #6
    USAU Board Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    166
    Just quickly, stall 6. Agreed with Stephen's line of reasoning. I think it's somewhat analogous to a pick called (affected the play), and a receiving foul on the reception. We resolve the foul for purposes of determining possession, but the stall count is based on the first call. May vary in different situations, but the reasoning is consistent.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts