Quote:
Originally posted by jritchie
A1 scores and is fouled by B1, A1 now is excited so he gestures "raise the roof" and screams "yyyyyeeeeeaaaahhhhh", B1 since it was pretty close to him and pretty loud didn't like it to well and Decks A1 with a right hook... Ruling??? B1 ejected for fighting, is A1 also ejected? (taunting) Free throw?? Alternating possesion?
|
I think that this play is a classic example of too much rule making by the NFHS/NCAA.
Now keep in mind that what follows is just my humble opinion based upon 34 years of basketball officiating at both levels.
In the beginning (at least my beginning) a player's actions were either sportsmanlike or unsportsmanlike. If a player's actions were unsportsmanlike, his actions were either flagrant or not flagrant. Each act was judged on its own. The way the rules are now written, there is too much other nonsense in them, that require a too much time to sort out the problem.
I would do away with the fighting rule period. I would keep the taunting rule and but I do not know if I would make it an automatic flagrant foul. The OhioHSAA treats the taunting rule per the rule book; it migh be flagrant or it might not be flagrant. It is a judgement call by the official. The MichiganHSAA stipulates that all taunting fouls are flagrant thereby taking away the official's judgment.
Look that the above problem. Lets assume, for the sake of this discussion, that A1's actions were not taunting. I know, from my playing days, that if I or one of my teammates were that excited about scoring that we had to play to the crowd, we would be taken out of the game at the earliest possible moment because it was obvious the we did not have our heads in the game. And when I got home my father would chew me a new tuckus for screwing around on the court. Actually he would not have waited, he would have been waiting for me outside of the lockerroom. Too many parents have forgotten that sports are played because they are fun, and they have also forgotten to teach their children to be humble in victory (I am not saying that you cannot be excited because one has won a game or championship; I mean exhibit good sportsmanship.) and to be gracious in defeat.
Now in the play being discussed, I am of the opinion that it is a play that one has to see in order to make the call. Lets further assume for the sake of this discussion that B1 did not react to A1's actions. The only decision that the official has to make is to determine whether A1's actions were unsportsmanlike or not. My own opinion is that if A1's actions were directed toward the spectators I might ignore, except to discretely tell him to concentrate on the game and not the spectators. If A1's actions were directed toward B1, now that is a horse of a different color. Forget fighting or taunting, A1's actions are unsportsmanlike, and whether his actions are flagrant or not should not be determined upon whether B1 responds to it or not. A1's actions stand alone. If B1 responds, his actions should stand on their own merit as to whether his actions are flagrant or not. Do not be too quick to jump to a fighting foul for both parties.
Look at the whole play.