Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FMadera
No need to interject additional (and incorrect) sanctions.
|
I'm not feeling well tonight so I may be a bit hypersensitive, but that sounds a little snotty.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FMadera
The penalty if the coach is wrong is UD. If 8 incorrect reviews result in 8 UD's, then you impose 8 UD's (and the corresponding penalty for the UD), and nothing else.
You have penalized the delay. They are allowed to review incorrect decisions. If they are wrong, they are penalized.
|
The rule book identifies the penalty for the coach being wrong as the assessment of a time out, and if the coach doesn't have a time out than LOR/point; UD isn't even mentioned. UD is something else entirely.
So, in your example, 8 incorrect reviews does not result in 8 UD's and it's corresponding penalty; 8 incorrect reviews results in either the coach having to burn his remain time outs and when he no longer has a time out left, then LOR/point.
It seems unreasonable and flies int the face of common sense that the rules permit a coach to make repeated challenges of the officials'' rulings. So, when I commented on what to do with a coach who continually requests reviews and he consistently does not prevail, there is, by rule, a mechanism to deal with that type of situation:
1. An assessment of UD (in addition to LOR/point for the unsuccessful challenge). UD does not only apply to the listed violations ("Unnecessary delay includes, but is not limited to when:") or (and probably more appropriate)
2. The administration of a yellow or red card to the coach (in addition to the LOR/point for the unsuccessful challenge). 12-2-8l specifically addresses this situation and permits this penalty.
I think that 8 unsuccessful challenges goes beyond simply assessing the LOR/point; there is more to be addressed. A coach who does something like that is making a mockery of the game, and of the officials who permit it to continue.
Of course this is all just .02 from a newer official.