The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   First Fighting Ejection (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/100394-first-fighting-ejection.html)

Raymond Wed Nov 25, 2015 01:05am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geof (Post 970723)
I'm not entirely sold on your ability to read. :confused:

Just out of curiosity....and this is a question for those who know the rules of NCAA and/or NBA, are the rules the same? That is, does doing something that causes someone else to retaliate by fighting result in an ejection?

NCAA--yes.
NFHS--yes.

Learned that part of the rule when I first learned the fight rules. It was always emphasized that an unsporting act that precipitates a fight is considered part of a fight. Great incentive for players to not do stupid stuff.

Don't know why any official would worry about the "fairness" of the rule or make excuses for why a player commits an unsporting act.

Geof Wed Nov 25, 2015 01:25am

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 970724)
NCAA--yes.
NFHS--yes.

Learned that part of the rule when I first learned the fight rules. It was always emphasized that an unsporting act that precipitates a fight is considered part of a fight. Great incentive for players to not do stupid stuff.

Good to know! Thank you for the information

AremRed Wed Nov 25, 2015 01:58am

We can debate the merits of the rule all day long, but it is pretty black and white as far as rules go: eject both. I think we can all agree that is how it reads, regardless of any literacy accusations. :)

Geof Wed Nov 25, 2015 02:03am

Quote:

Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 970733)
We can debate the merits of the rule all day long,

Well, as it turns out, trying to discuss the merits of the rule turns into accusations of trying to make excuses for unsporting acts haha.

JRutledge Wed Nov 25, 2015 02:06am

This was your post. ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geof (Post 970631)
The point I was making is that if the comments are so over the top as you stated, that person is being tossed regardless of the other player's reaction. If the comments aren't vulgar or abusive, that person's ability to stay in the game rests upon his opponent's reaction. Again, we'll just have to agree to disagree on whether that is a proper punishment.

Not a single person said anything about comments being penalized that were not unsporting for fighting, but that is your story right? (edited) Well here are your words, not mine. ;)

JRutledge Wed Nov 25, 2015 02:11am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geof (Post 970734)
In full agreement here

There is a difference between arguing what a rule should be and not knowing what the actual rule says. Again, all you have to do is look at your arguments. You did not realize that the rule for instigation was about an unsporting act like taunting or getting in a player's face (baiting). Just doing something that is a normal basketball play or even contact is not apart of this rule. You did not realize that and that is why you are getting called out for not understanding the rule.

Peace

Geof Wed Nov 25, 2015 02:13am

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 970735)
This was your post. ;)



Not a single person said anything about comments being penalized that were not unsporting for fighting, but that is your story right? But I have a reading comprehension problem? Well here are your words, not mine. ;)

Guess I'm not understanding your point....unless you are saying that something can't be unsporting if it is not vulgar or abusive.

Geof Wed Nov 25, 2015 02:17am

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 970736)
There is a difference between arguing what a rule should be and not knowing what the actual rule says. Again, all you have to do is look at your arguments. You did not realize that the rule for instigation was about an unsporting act like taunting or getting in a player's face (baiting). Just doing something that is a normal basketball play or even contact is not apart of this rule. You did not realize that and that is why you are getting called out for not understanding the rule.

Peace

I disagree with you. I understand the rule completely. And my argument this entire time has been as to whether the rule was fair or not to someone who does something unsporting that provokes a punch. I've never once said anything that went against the rule.

It sounds like most are ok with the way the rule is written, and I can understand that viewpoint. Its makes things black and white and easy to deal with.

JRutledge Wed Nov 25, 2015 02:31am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geof (Post 970738)
I disagree with you. I understand the rule completely. And my argument this entire time has been as to whether the rule was fair or not to someone who does something unsporting that provokes a punch. I've never once said anything that went against the rule.

What are you disagreeing with me about? I never said anything about this but what the rule states. I am not talking about fairness or even care about fairness. The rule is clear. I just stated that the what the rule is and how it is to be adjudicated. You are the one struggling with the rule and its application.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geof (Post 970738)
It sounds like most are ok with the way the rule is written, and I can understand that viewpoint. Its makes things black and white and easy to deal with.

I did not say anything about agreeing with the rule. I actually do not agree or disagree with the rule at all. The rule written very clearly. But it is not easy to deal with if you do not even understand when an instigator of a fight has taken place. ;)

Peace

Raymond Wed Nov 25, 2015 08:24am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geof (Post 970734)
Well, as it turns out, trying to discuss the merits of the rule turns into accusations of trying to make excuses for unsporting acts haha.

...

Well, let's see:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geof (Post 970624)
Ideally, yes. But people aren't robots.




__________________________________________________ _____________

You wish they could keep a player in the game after his unsporting act leads directly to a fight. You have clearly stated that's what you want:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geof (Post 970616)
I'm not a fan of the way this rule is written either. If A1 pushes B1, A1's fate rests in how B1 reacts....Not a huge fan of that.

The way the rule is written, A2 verbally insulting B2 which results in B2 punching A2 in the face means they both get tossed. Just doesn't feel like the punishment fits the crime.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geof (Post 970631)
It is pretty simple. And maybe that is why it is written the way it is written. The wording makes it pretty black and white. I don't agree with it.



The point I was making is that if the comments are so over the top as you stated, that person is being tossed regardless of the other player's reaction. If the comments aren't vulgar or abusive, that person's ability to stay in the game rests upon his opponent's reaction. Again, we'll just have to agree to disagree on whether that is a proper punishment.



I refuse to be the person who blindly accepts something without either understanding it or questioning it. The rules should be enforced as they are written, but that shouldn't ever deter someone from trying to discuss the validity or reason for a rule.

I don't feel sorry for players who are knuckleheads. Almost every fight in basketball is the result of one player committing an unsporting, flagrant, or intentional act directed towards another player. Players taunt opponents in order to induce a negative reaction. If that negative reaction is violent shove, a punch, or a kick, then too bad for the player who taunted, his butt is gone also.

Why any official wishes to keep such a player in the game is beyond comprehension.

Geof Wed Nov 25, 2015 11:19am

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 970739)
I did not say anything about agreeing with the rule. I actually do not agree or disagree with the rule at all. The rule written very clearly. But it is not easy to deal with if you do not even understand when an instigator of a fight has taken place.

I agree you never voiced your agreement/disagreement with the rule. I said "most people," i.e. the people who have replied to this thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 970742)
You wish they could keep a player in the game after his unsporting act leads directly to a fight.

No, I said I wasn't a huge fan of the way the rule itself is written. In certain situations, it doesn't seem like it would be a fair punishment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 970742)
I don't feel sorry for players who are knuckleheads. Almost every fight in basketball is the result of one player committing an unsporting, flagrant, or intentional act directed towards another player. Players taunt opponents in order to induce a negative reaction. If that negative reaction is violent shove, a punch, or a kick, then too bad for the player who taunted, his butt is gone also.

Sure, I can see why you think its fair.

mutantducky Wed Nov 25, 2015 12:00pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QZjJU-mtFU

:p

Raymond Wed Nov 25, 2015 01:17pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by bas2456 (Post 970779)
Could you two please take your squabble to PM or somewhere else...please?

If anyone else would like to weigh in about how they prepare for a fight as a crew, I'd like to get the thread back on track.

I pregame to do as much as we can to eliminate conditions that could lead to a fight. #1 on that list is dead ball officiating, #2 is no tolerance for knuckleheads.

JRutledge Wed Nov 25, 2015 01:22pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 970782)
I pregame to do as much as we can to eliminate conditions that could lead to a fight. #1 on that list is dead ball officiating, #2 is no tolerance for knuckleheads.

Usually just calling fouls and staying on top of silly action during dead balls solves most problems.

Peace

Adam Wed Nov 25, 2015 01:48pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geof (Post 970738)
I disagree with you. I understand the rule completely. And my argument this entire time has been as to whether the rule was fair or not to someone who does something unsporting that provokes a punch. I've never once said anything that went against the rule.

It sounds like most are ok with the way the rule is written, and I can understand that viewpoint. Its makes things black and white and easy to deal with.

This is how I read your point, for what it's worth.

Moderator note to all involved: No more personal insults.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:37pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1