To T or not to T; that is the question?

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Refhoop

I read the OP as the coach thinking it was a TO and only celebrating or "clapping his team" into a timeout huddle...
I didn't view it as "celebrating". If he was just stoic - would that change things?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For me? Mayyyyyyyyyyyyybe. However, the OP said the excitement was over the made basket.

[Smitty]

The OP as written, I'd be most likely to play on and not issue a T. No press, so the coach did not disrupt play. He had a brain fart and wasn't being argumentative. If the other coach said anything I'd tell him I would have done the same thing for him. I do not think this situation, as written, is T-worthy.

[frezer11]

I tend to agree with Adam. If this is clearly a miscommunication by the coach, I'm going to try to avoid a T (unless, of course, he does interfere with the play). I would also look at the spirit of the rule. I know this isn't a directly applicable analogy, but I liken it to the kid who takes the ball out of bounds after his team scores, but is clearly confused on the play. I'm not giving one there unless I have to, and I'm not giving one here unless I have to.

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Even though this is not the same situation. But we had a player in a game earlier in the year basically threw the ball at an official (it was not me). I heard about the situation the first time, I witness the second incident. The official in question never gave a T for the action. The kid was a "problem child" in many ways in this game and we never took care of him (and he gave us chances). Then to make a long story short, the AD of the particular school tried to accuse the official of doing something improper.

The lesson I learned (and the official in question learned) that we have to just apply the rules on these kinds of things and constantly giving a pass for bad behavior. If we had given this kid a T in the game, maybe we did not have deal with the accusations after the game. Oh and the "incident" is on tape too. I just think we find too many ways to ignore something obvious because we do not want to be the "story." But we do that to our own peril in many ways.

Peace

I don't think this scenario is very similar, and I realize you said that right off the bat, but the kid was deliberately doing something wrong in yours, and absolutely needed to get a T (And depending on how hard he threw the ball, he might even be leaving the game for good) whereas in the OP, it was clearly a mistake out of confusion.

[Refhoop]

Originally Posted by Smitty

The OP as written, I'd be most likely to play on and not issue a T. No press, so the coach did not disrupt play. He had a brain fart and wasn't being argumentative. If the other coach said anything I'd tell him I would have done the same thing for him. I do not think this situation, as written, is T-worthy.

Exactly!
To the opposing coach: if I even thought this was intentional I would have whacked him.
We got a great game going - let's get back to basketball.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dad]

Originally Posted by frezer11

I tend to agree with Adam. If this is clearly a miscommunication by the coach, I'm going to try to avoid a T (unless, of course, he does interfere with the play). I would also look at the spirit of the rule. I know this isn't a directly applicable analogy, but I liken it to the kid who takes the ball out of bounds after his team scores, but is clearly confused on the play. I'm not giving one there unless I have to, and I'm not giving one here unless I have to.

You're going to have to if it's the second delay-of-game warning. The spirit of the rule is stay in your bloody coaching box. They didn't write the box rule for us to determine when we should and shouldn't enforce it.

There's no inadvertent whistle. No one said TO. No player thinks there is a TO. There's zero confusion for me to give this coach any room to leave the coaching box.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by frezer11

I don't think this scenario is very similar, and I realize you said that right off the bat, but the kid was deliberately doing something wrong in yours, and absolutely needed to get a T (And depending on how hard he threw the ball, he might even be leaving the game for good) whereas in the OP, it was clearly a mistake out of confusion.

I did not suggest the scenario was very similar other than if a coach does something that clearly violates rules and you allow it, they will think that behavior is OK. Then the next time they get penalized when someone is not buying their position, they cannot say, "Well the other officials let me do it...."

In the OP, I do not know many coaches just entering the court until they are supposed to like an official actually grants a timeout.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Dad

You're going to have to if it's the second delay-of-game warning. The spirit of the rule is stay in your bloody coaching box. They didn't write the box rule for us to determine when we should and shouldn't enforce it.

There's no inadvertent whistle. No one said TO. No player thinks there is a TO. There's zero confusion for me to give this coach any room to leave the coaching box.

No, that's the *letter* of the rule.

The spiriit could be the same...or not.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by Dad

You're going to have to if it's the second delay-of-game warning. The spirit of the rule is stay in your bloody coaching box. They didn't write the box rule for us to determine when we should and shouldn't enforce it.

There's no inadvertent whistle. No one said TO. No player thinks there is a TO. There's zero confusion for me to give this coach any room to leave the coaching box.

Delay of game warning? There is no such DOG. In my neck of the woods, we are fairly lax with the coaching box. So I get it if you are in a zero tolerance zone. But if we started giving out T's every time the coach steps out of the box, we'd have a lot of games with coaches sitting in their chair for 31 minutes.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Refhoop

Exactly!
To the opposing coach: if I even thought this was intentional I would have whacked him.
We got a great game going - let's get back to basketball.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Where do the rules say anything about it having to be intentional?

The coach shall remain seated on the team bench, except:

The coach gets to stay in his box. If he leaves the box it's a technical. Almost all coaches follow this rule so why are we giving the misbehaving ones a pass?

[WhistlesAndStripes]

Originally Posted by Dad

You're going to have to if it's the second delay-of-game warning. The spirit of the rule is stay in your bloody coaching box. They didn't write the box rule for us to determine when we should and shouldn't enforce it.

There's no inadvertent whistle. No one said TO. No player thinks there is a TO. There's zero confusion for me to give this coach any room to leave the coaching box.

Honestly, how many of us whack every coach we interact with the first time they step out of the coaching box? I think the answer is pretty close to ZERO, so justifying this T as being because he came out of the box is ridiculous.

As written, he brainfarted, and I'm not punishing him unless he interfered with the play somehow.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Dad

You're going to have to if it's the second delay-of-game warning. The spirit of the rule is stay in your bloody coaching box. They didn't write the box rule for us to determine when we should and shouldn't enforce it.

There's no inadvertent whistle. No one said TO. No player thinks there is a TO. There's zero confusion for me to give this coach any room to leave the coaching box.

So do you hit him up if he's standing just outside the box?

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Rich

No, that's the *letter* of the rule.

The spiriit could be the same...or not.

Literal and intent go hand in hand here, imo, when they made the rule for coaches staying in the box. Well, at least very similar.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Dad

For me? Mayyyyyyyyyyyyybe. However, the OP said the excitement was over the made basket.

No, it says he's acting as if there's a timeout AND mildly celebrating the made basket. He's not out high fiving his shooter, he thought there was a TO.

If the other coach asks, I'll give him the "I'd do the same for you" and add that if he had interfered with play, I would have called it.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Smitty

Delay of game warning? There is no such DOG. In my neck of the woods, we are fairly lax with the coaching box. So I get it if you are in a zero tolerance zone. But if we started giving out T's every time the coach steps out of the box, we'd have a lot of games with coaches sitting in their chair for 31 minutes.

There is such a thing in the example he gave. Here ya go:

Immediately following a goal or free throw by Team A, A1 inbounds the ball to A2 and A2 subsequently throws the ball through A's basket. RULING: The following procedure has been adopted to handle this specific situations if it is recognized before the opponents gain control or before the next throw-in begins: A) Tech B) delay of game warning c/d/e) blah blah blah. Comment: If there is no doubt the throw-in was a result of confusion, the entire procedure would be follow except the tech. If it's the second delay-of-game there is a tech.