Illegal or not?? Please Help!!

[Jewls885]

Need your help with this…….
During the first game of District Tournament, Team A put a coach (who had been fired a few weeks earlier and also happens to be the husband of the now head coach. ) at the top of the stands with a cell phone, to call down to a coach on Team A’s bench, who was wearing a hidden bluetooth headset. The fired coach in the bleachers called all of the plays, where Team B’s gaps were, who to double team, who was dropping down on defense, and how to run the offense on Team B’s defensive holes.
They won the game and were caught at the end and turned by the officials who were refereeing the next game. In disputing this, Team B was told there was nothing illegal done and that they (Team B) could have done the same thing because NFHS approved the use of electronic devices for basketball. The head coach of Team was fired that night due to her actions of using wireless communication. This happened in Kentucky by the way, and KHSAA said that nothing can be done. Does anybody on this forum know the rules on this??? It’s a shame that Team B was put at such a competitive disadvantage and not allowed to advance.
All coaches involved admitted what they had done to the Board of Control, as well as KHSAA.

[NNJOfficial]

It depends on whether the rules of the particular state differ from the NFHS. The NFHS rule allowing use of electronic devices is to allow the use of IPads and similar technology on the sideline for the purpose of coaching and gathering stats. It specifically prevents their use for communication.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bob jenkins]

Case 10.1.3A makes this a team T.

I applaud school A for firing the coach of Team A.

[BryanV21]

In the Technical-Foul Penalty Summary of the 2015-16 NFHS Rules Book, under Administrative, it lists "electronic communication". This would be a team technical foul, and count towards team foul count.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Case 10.1.3A makes this a team T.

I applaud school A for firing the coach of Team A.

Am I reading this wrong, or is ruling in this case play incorrect? It says 10.1.3A is legal (looking at the 15-16 case book), while 10-1-3 clearly states that using an electronic communication device is a technical foul.

[River Ref]

Jerk married to Jerkette. Both canned,Great!

[Jewls885]

Kentucky rules do not differ from NFHS rules.
When I challenged the use of electronic devices for communication, I was basically told that I was misinterpreting the rule and that the rule meant a coach couldn't communicate with a player on the floor (as in if the player were wearing an earpiece). Below is an email that was sent to Julian Tackett, KHSAA interpreter and his reply...

Dear Mr. Tackett,

I’m writing you today to respectfully ask for your help, as well as interpretation, regarding an incident that took place at our girl’s district basketball tournament. I made several attempts to reach you and did leave a voicemail for your assistant today, asking that someone return my call but did not get a reply.

I’m sure you are aware of the situation, with regards to the McLean County vs Ohio County girls’ basketball district game this past Monday. I spoke with Butch Cope this morning, who stated that McLean County’s coaches did nothing wrong concerning this situation and that the use of an illegal coach at the top of the bleachers, calling from his cell phone to a coach on their bench, while using bluetooth to communicate during the game, was an acceptable practice and that our team could have done the same. The McLean County coaches used these devices to gain a competitive advantage over our team during district play, allowing for plays to be called from the top of the bleachers from the birdseye view of an illegal coach, who continually called which plays to run, where to set screens, where our gaps were, and which of our players to double team. He had a birdseye view of the court, and was in a position that a coach on the bench or in the coaches box, could have NEVER had. This is a completely unethical practice and would not fall within acceptable NFHS Coaches Code of Ethics.

Mr. Cope stated that this behavior and unethical practice was acceptable since a rule was passed last year that would allow the use of electronic equipment. I, however, understand/interpret this rule as allowing the use of tablets to gather and record statistical information and that the uses of such devices were to be utilized solely for such purpose.
I also understand/interpret KHSAA bylaw 15 to be understood as a team or staff member may not use any equipment that would give one team a competitive advantage over the other during a game, which was the exact conclusion of their use of these devices.

KHSAA bylaw 15 reads as follows:
Sec 2) ILLEGAL EQUIPMENT/VIDEOTAPING
a) It shall be considered a violation of this rule if any school or school representative(s) uses or allows the use of illegal equipment which gains a competitive advantage in the contest and which is expressly prohibited by the rules adopted for that sport.

I am respectfully asking for your help regarding this matter. Please do not excuse the actions of unethical coaches and send the wrong message to these young ladies. Allowing advancement of one team over the other when neither is at fault would be completely unjust. These girls work hard all season and they do so with anticipation of tournament competition.
These coaches not only took from our girls, but theirs as well. Would the outcome of the game been any different had the unethical coaches not used the devices? Nobody could possibly know this now. Is it fair that their girls be punished for something they possibly didn’t know anything about? No!
Now with that being said, should our girls be punished because they were put at a competitive disadvantage, which possibly cost them advancement in the tournament? No!
In my opinion, the fair thing to do in this case is to have the two teams to play again, without the use of unethical or illegal equipment. Another solution would be to allow Ohio County to advance to regional play. I would appreciate hearing from you regarding this matter either by phone or email.


Sincerely,
*******

Mr. Tackett's reply......

From: Tackett, Julian [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 10:40 AM
To: *****
Subject: Re: McLean County vs Ohio County

Thank you for your note. Mr. Cope has given you the proper interpretation in that what was done is not illegal per the playing rules or the KHSAA rules. At this point, Bylaw 15 is irrelevant as it only applies to illegal equipment. Per the playing rules, this equipment was not illegal, so that provision does not apply.

As for the playing rules, there continues to be a prohibition against communicating with players electronically, but not among coaches. This situation, and three others like it that have occurred this year in various states, will place this issue on the agenda for the national rules committee to consider whether or not there should be further restrictions. And while what was done (communication to the bench from somewhere else) may not be illegal this year, that answer could very well change for the coming years. And if such does not change, then all schools should be notified and allowed to have the same opportunities. It is important that the rules committee address this situation for a variety of reasons. This type of communication is perfectly permissible in many sports (i.e. football), but, in reality, has never been addressed for basketball as it wasn't necessary to address when no communication devices were permitted. That clarity will help all of us in the future.

Because nothing against any playing rules was done, there is obviously no needed remedy of replaying contests, etc.

I appreciate the professional tone of your inquiry and when the rules committee makes any decisions about future playing rules, we will notify all of our member schools so that they can prepare for the coming seasons.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Jewls885

Mr. Tackett's reply......

From: Tackett, Julian [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 10:40 AM
To: *****
Subject: Re: McLean County vs Ohio County

Thank you for your note. Mr. Cope has given you the proper interpretation in that what was done is not illegal per the playing rules or the KHSAA rules. At this point, Bylaw 15 is irrelevant as it only applies to illegal equipment. Per the playing rules, this equipment was not illegal, so that provision does not apply.

As for the playing rules, there continues to be a prohibition against communicating with players electronically, but not among coaches. This situation, and three others like it that have occurred this year in various states, will place this issue on the agenda for the national rules committee to consider whether or not there should be further restrictions. And while what was done (communication to the bench from somewhere else) may not be illegal this year, that answer could very well change for the coming years. And if such does not change, then all schools should be notified and allowed to have the same opportunities. It is important that the rules committee address this situation for a variety of reasons. This type of communication is perfectly permissible in many sports (i.e. football), but, in reality, has never been addressed for basketball as it wasn't necessary to address when no communication devices were permitted. That clarity will help all of us in the future.

Because nothing against any playing rules was done, there is obviously no needed remedy of replaying contests, etc.

I appreciate the professional tone of your inquiry and when the rules committee makes any decisions about future playing rules, we will notify all of our member schools so that they can prepare for the coming seasons.

If what he's saying were true, then why does Rule 10-1-3 say that using "any electronic communication device" were a technical foul, and goes on to say that "electronic equipment for voice communication with players on the court" was also a technical foul? Was the NFHS just being redundant?

[Jewls885]

I agree and have argued, cited rules, bylaws and still get told that I am misinterpreting this and that what they did was legal!! Can anybody help me with this??

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

If what he's saying were true, then why does Rule 10-1-3 say that using "any electronic communication device" were a technical foul, and goes on to say that "electronic equipment for voice communication with players on the court" was also a technical foul? Was the NFHS just being redundant?

It is legal to do what they did under nfhs rules. You can't communicate with players on the court and you can't use it to review a decision of the officials. For coaching purpose you can do it.

[Jewls885]

But they did use it to communicate with players on the floor.

[frezer11]

Man, something seems fishy here, doesn't seem to pass the eye test. Although it would look weird, I suppose it would now be legal for a coaching staff to take one of the school's football headsets and do the same thing then? Gonna have to think more on this one, I feel like there is something we're missing here.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Jewls885

But they did use it to communicate with players on the floor.

You can relay things from up top to the bench. You can't have a kid with a device on the floor. See 10.1.3a. It is the same type of play.

[River Ref]

Originally Posted by Jewls885

But they did use it to communicate with players on the floor.

From the mouth of the coach,is not electronic communication to the players.

[Jewls885]

They did however tell us that in April, the wording would be changed so this wasn't allowed. As far as I'm concerned, that's how it already reads!