Would you address this?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by UNIgiantslayers

Since I'm the new T during the FT, I'm going to address it with the coach. As he's walking to the bench after being subbed: "Coach, he's going to knock that off or he's going to cost your team 2 free throws." If I'm the C or the L, I'm addressing it with him in not very many words.

And at that point, it's an indirect on the coach if you call it. Coach has more incentive to fix it now.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BDevil15

Player on opposing team is in foul trouble all game long. Picks up his 4th on a questionable call in the 3rd quarter. He had his hands up and my player lowered his shoulder a bit and hit him below the chest, defenders arms came down and he got called for his 4th. He of course stands there looking back and forth between the officials and his coach with his hand straight up in the basketball international symbol for "But.... I was straight up". Anyways, as he lines up for the first free throw his arms are still straight up. As he leaves upon being subbed he is still holding his hands straight up. As he sits on the bench for 10 minutes he is sitting there with his hands straight up. As he checks in in the 4th quarter he goes to the table with his hands still raised, he continues to play standing with his hands straight up with the exception of the two times he caught the ball on offense. During a time out, hands still above his head. With about two minutes in the game he finally fouls out even though he has made it clear by this point that he has been in LGP for a good 25 minutes by having his hands straight up(yes that is sarcasm). He then stands in the same pose, takes as long as possible to leave the court, finally walks off the baseline and around the outside of the court through my bench area and finally to his bench where he continued to sit with his arms raised until the game concluded.

The officials did a great job of ignoring him the entire time, but I am wondering if anyone here would have addressed it, either through the coach or directly at some point? I found it incredibly disrespectful and that the kid was showing up the officials in a really unacceptable way. Curious what you feel. I wouldn't allow my players to behave this way but maybe I am just sensitive to this for some reason. Curious if you guys would address it or just let the child act like a child. Boys Varsity by the way.

I would have "whacked" him at some point during the time period described in red.

That said, there was a time up to the early 1970s, a player (H.S. and college) had to raise one hand straight up over his/her head after being charged with a PF so has to make it easier for the Scorer to identify who committed the PF. When that requirement was eliminated it became a TF for a few years for a player, after being charged with a PF, to raise his/her arm over his/her head to show displeasure with the official's call.

What still amazes me is that even today, that on occasion I will have a player raise his arm straight up after being called for a PF, not to show displeasure with the call but to let everybody know that he committed the PF.

So ends tonight's history lesson.

MTD, Sr.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

What still amazes me is that even today, that on occasion I will have a player raise his arm straight up after being called for a PF, not to show displeasure with the call but to let everybody know that he committed the PF.

I see that occasionally, but more often I see it from a player trying to take a foul rather than have it be given to a teammate. This may or may not be an act of total deception.

[UNIgiantslayers]

Originally Posted by Adam

And at that point, it's an indirect on the coach if you call it. Coach has more incentive to fix it now.

Just because I'm always fuzzy on indirect vs player TF in these gray areas, I'm going to make sure I'm correct on this. If he's still on the floor but on his way to the bench, it's charged to the player. If he is off the floor, it's charged to both the player and an indirect to the coach. Is that correct?

[JRutledge]

I simply say, "You better get them arms down" and if it does not stop, then that is what the T is for. Never gets to that point after confronting the player.

Peace

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by UNIgiantslayers

Just because I'm always fuzzy on indirect vs player TF in these gray areas, I'm going to make sure I'm correct on this. If he's still on the floor but on his way to the bench, it's charged to the player. If he is off the floor, it's charged to both the player and an indirect to the coach. Is that correct?

No, it's not correct.

It has nothing to do with his physical location and everything to do with whether he's a player or bench personnel.

And, he moves from the former to the latter when .... (I'll leave that up to you to go research)

[UNIgiantslayers]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

No, it's not correct.

It has nothing to do with his physical location and everything to do with whether he's a player or bench personnel.

And, he moves from the former to the latter when .... (I'll leave that up to you to go research)

Thanks for the correction. My rulebook is in my suitcase in the back of the pickup, so it'll be a bit before I can look into that.

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by jamesshank

I might let him look like an idiot. Also, his coach looks like an idiot for letting him continue bc I know the player can't play very well like this.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

And what good could possibly come from allowing this?

[jamesshank]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

And what good could possibly come from allowing this?

I think that sometimes coaches and players are looking for a t to justify their behavior. In this instance, I feel allowing them to look idiotic might be worth it.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[UNIgiantslayers]

Originally Posted by jamesshank

I think that sometimes coaches and players are looking for a t to justify their behavior. In this instance, I feel allowing them to look idiotic might be worth it.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

If that's his way of asking, I'm happy to oblige.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jamesshank

I think that sometimes coaches and players are looking for a t to justify their behavior. In this instance, I feel allowing them to look idiotic might be worth it.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

If they want one, give it to them. There's no reason not to and plenty of reasons to stop that behavior.

Frankly I have always found the "he wanted one so I wouldn't give it to him" to be an extremely weak basis on which to avoid a T. It's unnecessarily stubborn at best, and cowardice at worst.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by UNIgiantslayers

Just because I'm always fuzzy on indirect vs player TF in these gray areas, I'm going to make sure I'm correct on this. If he's still on the floor but on his way to the bench, it's charged to the player. If he is off the floor, it's charged to both the player and an indirect to the coach. Is that correct?

Becomes bench personnel when his sub is beckoned.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk