Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 982720)

Not true. Print formats have certain production restraints and budget issues. They can very well be limited to a specific number of pages. They drop things all the time without intending for them to no longer apply. Unless there is a statement to say it has changed, it is just as likely to apply as to not apply.

Originally Posted by Jewls885 (Post 982683)

I appreciate and thank everyone for their input on this. It's just been a very frustrating situation and you hate to see anything taken away from either group of girls because of unethical actions of adults. I truly believe you will be seeing changes in the next rule book.

Originally Posted by jTheUmp (Post 982701)

Football, of course, has allowed "spotters" in the pressbox for as long as I can remember, although football is very different due to size of the playing field and number of players participating at once.

Methinks a clarification or "editorial change" will be forthcoming from the NFHS on this for next season... personally, I think this type of thing shouldn't be allowed in basketball, but if NFHS decides to allow this type of communication that's fine too... one less AC on the bench to potentially have a problem with.

Originally Posted by Refhoop (Post 982726)

What's unethical about this?
Seems you're more hung up on him being fired... for what reason i don't know or care - that's the districts issue.
Do we really expect that a fired husband/coach won't help his wife in any way possible to win!?
If the rules don't disallow it, why is it wrong?
If he was sitting behind the bench and giving her information, would this be wrong or none of our business?
BTW: When a parent is in the stands coaching their kid - do we consider this cheating?
Also, if they're still winning - maybe they're just better!

Originally Posted by Jewls885 (Post 982731)

NFHS Basketball Interpretations
Situation 1
May electronic devices be used in dead ball situations, such as free throws and throw-ins to communicate with players officially in the game?

RULING: No, the coaching staff may not use an electronic device to communicate with the players on the playing court at any time. They may use an electronic device to coach the players on the bench at any time.

.

Originally Posted by Jewls885 (Post 982731)

Ouch! Sorry, didn't mean to rude - I'm actually grateful for this discussion. Listen, I personally could care less why the jerk (calling him a jerk, sounds biased) was fired from this school a month prior or why he was fired from the one before, and had he been behind the bench, he would have had the same viewpoint as other coaches. I meant behind the opposing team's bench... listening in on their huddle. Don't think for a second this isn't happening in basketball... My concern was for the girls. How was this suppose to be viewed when the referees that night said it was illegal and reported it as such to KHSAA or when the coaches (wife and assistant) got fired that very night for doing what they did? The folks doing the firing were wrong - if their reasoning is simply because of the reason giving in the first post. It looked and felt funny - so they fired the coach. They'll have some explaining to do in front of a judge. I'm not the one who fired them, hell, I didn't even know what happened until the next night! I'm not the one who turned them in, it was the officials and THEIR OWN school administration (if the offiicals don't know the rules - non one else in the gym likely will, especially a school administrator) who did this, so obviously they must have deemed it unethical/illegal in their eyes or at least questioned it. I was only asking for clarification since there seems to be so many mixed views. I understand that this is perfectly legal in football and apparently basketball now too, but with regards to other sports such as baseball, softball, track and field, soccer and even golf, it states no wireless communication, some specifically stating the use of cell phones, so why is it such a reach that it might have been wrong in basketball. There is no competitive advantage in basketball. I.E.: A team is running a 2-3 defense; everyone knows to run "short-corner", or penetrate gaps and kick to a wing or corner or bring a post player to the elbow. There really aren't secrets about this game that need to be unlocked in a district game. IMO: I'd just chalk this up to an insecure wife - wanting her husband's help in a game that made her nervous. It just comes down to who has the best players. To my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong, I'm sure you will, of the position of a coach in basketball is they must be either in the coaching box or on the bench. With that being said, the reasoning is so that each coach has the same viewpoint of the court and same competitive advantage.
I'd agree with you if their were no AAU coaches, parent coaches and now position gurus and these games that the kids are often times paying more attention to than the high school coach on the bench...

NFHS Basketball Interpretations
Situation 1
May electronic devices be used in dead ball situations, such as free throws and throw-ins to communicate with players officially in the game?

RULING: No, the coaching staff may not use an electronic device to communicate with the players on the playing court at any time. They may use an electronic device to coach the players on the bench at any time.

The confusion seems to lie in whether or not they are talking about the player using an earpiece. My argument on this is... If allowable for a coach to use said electronic device with players on the bench, they must not be (no way to know this - if its not stated) talking of an earpiece, because why the hell would you need an earpiece to communicate with a player that was sitting right next to you?? I just think how it's written, since it doesn't specifically say earpiece, cellphone, tablet...all of which could be construed as "wireless communication" and "electronic devices," is a little confusing and leaves it wide open for argument between NFHS and KHSAA writings, which also state that it may not be used to gain a competitive advantage over an opposing team in any contest. Would not doing what they did have changed the outcome of the game? Who knows? Although I will add that we handed them a loss (are you a fan of this team, coach or an official?) at our last meeting and after the husband was let go, they lost every game (4 or 5) up until (How did you "hand" them a lost?)
the game with us, which was at the district tournament. Again, who knows what the outcome would have been, but that's besides the point. The point is, I was just asking for clarification on rules and interpretations that could have been better written to avoid the confusion. I guess we will all know in April, when as we were told, the wording would probably be changed.

Originally Posted by Refhoop (Post 982752)

Originally Posted by Jewls885 (Post 982874)

I just want to thank you all for your replies and interpretations, they have been very enlightening. I think the one thing we can all pretty much agree on is that the wording could be more clear and I am very anxious to see what changes, if any, will be made in April.
Thanks again everyone!!