| Adam |
Wed Jan 20, 2016 06:56pm |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad
(Post 977306)
If you're referring to the OP, not in the slightest.
The bold section was what I originally responded to from Frezer. My point is by rule the confused kid doesn't get a technical unless it's the 2nd DOG in the game. At which point you're forced to give a technical -- doesn't matter if you don't want to give it to him or not. (This part is only about the case book play)
The rules don't say anything about giving a coach a warning. Therefore, a T is the only option if he runs out of the box. I don't think it's a good idea to teach officials to put aside rules because they judged spirit and intent. Top officials in most associations can make this call no problem, but on average officials will screw it up and get into trouble.
|
I think you should probably hesitate before judging the quality of officials who would refrain from calling a T in the OP.
In the case play you posted, the point was that an immediate and direct T is not assessed because the player was confused. The rule is different, in that if the officials judge action to be intentional and deliberate, a T is in order with or without a previous DOG warning on record. With confusion, a DOG is sufficient.
The OP does not allow for a DOG. It's a T or nothing. Many would do each. That's ok. I know there are some "top officials" from several associations here who have stated they would refrain in that specific situation.
I'm not including myself here. I can tell you, however, that the response from my association if I were to call a T in the OP would be to publicly back my call if I made it, but any of the top officials observing my game would ask me privately if I could have maybe held off on it. |
