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

[Gutierrez7]

Scenario:
- Varsity Boys
- Team A is the visiting team
- First half
- Score tied

Team A scores a basket and proceeds to run back and play normal defense in their backcourt. Player B1 has legally received the ball in bounds and proceeds to dribble casually up the court in his backcourt (near the foul line). The New Trail official is located just in front of the end line (table side) and administering the 10 second count as Team B is bringing up the ball.

During such time, Coach A, acting as if there was a time out (NO time out was called or granted), runs onto the court and stops around the top of the key (elbow, table side) and demonstrates mild excitement from the made basket. The New Lead official is approaching/approached the end line (opposite table) and witnesses Coach A’s actions. Coach A realizes NO time out was called and immediately leaves the court, in an embarrassed behavior. The New Trail official also witnesses Coach A’s actions.

Question:
Do you give a technical foul to Coach A?

If you answer YES; what possible reasons/rules would you site; which official(s) should signal for the foul, Lead, Trail or Both?
Side note: what if the New Lead does not signal? Does that change your answer?

If you answer NO; what possible reasons/rules would you site? I.e. didn’t get a good look, to far away to make the call, coach didn’t touch any players, etc…

Your professional input is appreciated as always.

[Adam]

No, I probably wouldn't unless he interfered with play in some way.

He obviously broke the rule, but tucked tail and ran when he realized it.

citation? Spirit and intent.

[Dad]

Are you sure he thought there was a TO? If so, why did he think so?

I'm not seeing passing on a T for a coach running out into the middle of the floor to show excitement over a made basket. Few feet out of his box? Sure, probably. All the way to the key? Not with the information I have so far.

Varsity coach making this kind of mistake seems like incompetence. If he claimed he thought there was a TO I'd be more inclined to give him a T just for a terrible excuse. At least bend down and pretend like you're picking up something for the 'safety of the players.'

Rule: There is a coaching box for a reason.

[UNIgiantslayers]

I tend to agree with the coaching box violation T. Passing on this, to me, comes off similar to those who don't enforce the uniform rules. What are you going to do late in the game when the other coach does the same thing but says he thought there was a timeout? It's a lot easier to explain a situation to an assignor when a rule backs your decision (i.e. "I gave a T because he was outside the coach's box," as opposed to "I didn't think he was lying to me.") That's not to say that I think any less on those who are inclined to pass as I can see both sides, just giving my reasoning. Just my $.02.

[JRutledge]

I think you give a T if you had to stop play to address his situation.

We officiate mistakes and if he overreacted to something that was not given, that is really not our problem. And here is the worst part, this is likely on video and you have decide to ignore an obvious violation of the rules. Someone will have a case to complain you did not apply an obvious violation. Now if he did not interfere, that is another story all together. I would try my best not to give one, but he sounds like he gave the officials little choice.

Peace

[Adam]

I would not fault another official who made the call, and would back his or her play if it was called.

I see this as similar to the coach who comes out onto the court to get our attention to request a TO. By rule, it's a T that could be called. I just don't think it fits the intent of the rule.

Now, if the coach actually interferes in any way with the play I'd call it without hesitation.

[Rich]

If I stop play, I'm giving a technical foul.

Will I stop play in order to assess one? Maybe.

[Mark Padgett]

No doubt.

[Refhoop]

Can we give him a delay of game and move on if it was an innocent mistake?
Sounds a little goofy to be intentional... But if he's really goofy, maybe he should be forced to sit the rest of the game?
I can live with the "T" call, D.O.G. Call or a no-call.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I think you give a T if you had to stop play to address his situation.

We officiate mistakes and if he overreacted to something that was not given, that is really not our problem. And here is the worst part, this is likely on video and you have decide to ignore an obvious violation of the rules. Someone will have a case to complain you did not apply an obvious violation. Now if he did not interfere, that is another story all together. I would try my best not to give one, but he sounds like he gave the officials little choice.

Peace

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

No doubt.

I agree 100%!

MTD, Sr.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Refhoop

Can we give him a delay of game and move on if it was an innocent mistake?

No. This is not one of four cases where a DOG warning should be issued.

It's either a T or nothing.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Adam

I would not fault another official who made the call, and would back his or her play if it was called.

I see this as similar to the coach who comes out onto the court to get our attention to request a TO. By rule, it's a T that could be called. I just don't think it fits the intent of the rule.

Now, if the coach actually interferes in any way with the play I'd call it without hesitation.

If a coach comes onto the floor yelling for a TO I don't see it as being similar. It's more than likely we weren't hearing him. I could justify this to just about anyone.

In the OP's case I find it different and borderline unsportsmanlike behavior. What are you going to do when the other coach asks why you didn't give the coach a technical for running half-way onto the court to celebrate a basket?

The rule is the coach is supposed to stay in his box. The intent is to keep the coach from leaving said box. All the players didn't think there was a TO, but the coach did? This is one of those situations, for me, where reasoning doesn't hold much wait, if any.

I'm not saying it's wrong to pass on this, but I'm having a hard time rationalizing it.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Refhoop

Can we give him a delay of game and move on if it was an innocent mistake?
Sounds a little goofy to be intentional... But if he's really goofy, maybe he should be forced to sit the rest of the game?
I can live with the "T" call, D.O.G. Call or a no-call.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's actually the one thing you cannot do.

[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

[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