1.9 Sec left in Playoff game TO Granted with none left leads to Coach Ejection (Video

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by U99

Let me answer a few questions:

The "new rule" nobody between lane lines. Game administration was asked to keep that area free for the game. The main entry way is there. They stopped people there while the play was occurring on that end. Each opportunity they had, they moved people in the gym and away from that area, as we also did many times.

Benches. Due to staircases and the layout of the gym the benches have always been moved to where you see them. Not the best scenario, but the home team management places the benches (1-13-1). This was the last game in this gym as the new one is almost finished.

The play:

The foul at 0:01.9 was a hard foul, but a basketball play. Nothing intentional or flagrant. (Double whistle) The trainer for white ran onto the court. When #5 went to the line to shoot and realized he was staying into the court, one official went to St. Augustine coach to let him know he needed to call a timeout to keep his player in the game or to sub him (3-2-6). He called a time out.

First free throw made. Foothills Christian (black) calls their final timeout. The scorer notifies FCHS head coach that is his last timeout and he acknowledges in front of the official.

Second free Throw missed and rebounded by FCHS #5. Prior to securing the rebound, but knowing that #5 will get it as he is all alone, #3 turns to the new trail and begins yelling "time-out" many times progressively louder and by signaling visually multiple times for a time-out. The request is granted. In addition as FCHS was walking to their bench you can see that #1 is also signaling time-out.

As the calling official goes to report the timeout, signaling toward the black team's bench (it was very loud in the gym) the head coach for FCHS gets in the way of the official and doesn't allow him to get to report. (The scorers table is two rows up into the stands, so all officials had to be a little closer to the sideline when reporting during loud moments). As the coach is screaming "no he didn't, no he didn't" the official tells the coach to return to the bench and let the crew get together as the game is not over. The coach ignores the request and continues on to the official repeating the same thing. The official repeats to the coach that the game is NOT over and to please allow us to figure it (technical foul, resumption of play, time remaining, etc) out. He continues coming at the official finally snapping his head and yelling "bulls**t". (So much for the newspaper and CIF report of no profanity) The calling official now gives an unsporting technical foul to the head coach of FCHS. The coach turns away and goes to his bench. As the official is (finally) reporting the excessive time out and the unsporting technical, FCHS head coach returns to scream at the calling official, "How can you call that!" over and over. The calling official now walks toward the semi-circle at half court but feeling the coach follow him, decides to turn around for his own safety. The official backs up to the other sideline and (finally) with no place left to go, looks over the shoulder of the coach to his partner who gives him his second (and disqualifying) technical foul and ejects him.
Time remaining was 1.9 at the initial final free Throw. Since by rule possession requires a minimum of 0:00.3 seconds to run off, the crew decided that they would take off 0:00.4 resulting in 0:01.5 showing on the clock.

FCHS #1 leaving the gym. During an intermission or a time-out all players are considered bench personnel (4-34-2). The requirement of not leaving the playing court is for players (10-3-6-i). A player is defined as "one of five team members who are legally on the court at any given time, except intermission." (4-34-1)
An assistant coach retrieved #1 and he returned to the game as a player following the time-out.

I hope all questions were answered here. I will not comment or reply on anything regarding crew chemistry, comments of partners not doing their job or anything else negative. The crew talked about many things in the post game. In addition, two state evaluators were in the gym, and the post game as well as the association president and many other officials.
Thank you.

Very straight-forward and factual report. Thank you.
A couple of rules things for you to contemplate should you wish.
1. There is no NFHS rule extant that a player gaining possession of a ball from a rebound or throw-in after the clock has been stopped requires 3/10ths of a second. The NBA does have such a rule. The NFHS has issued a ruling that the officials need to make some allowance for the catching of the ball in such situations, if there is a timing error, and that allowance is "likely tenths of a second." How many is at the discretion of the officials. Don't confuse this with the NFHS rule requiring more than 3/10ths of a second remaining in a quarter in order for a player to catch and try for goal. How long it takes to catch and shoot is not the same as how long it takes to just catch a ball.
The crew did the right thing by removing some tenths from the clock for the rebound being secured during the immediate time-out request, but don't cite a 0.3 seconds rule for this. The crew could have removed only 0.2, if it believed that was accurate.
2. The correct rule for dealing with FCHS #1 leaving the gym is actually 10-6-5: "The head coach shall not permit team members to leave the bench area and/or playing court for an unauthorized reason." It most certainly applies to more than the five players because it specifies team members. It was crafted a few years ago and is designed to keep the team members in the bench area and prevent them from entering the stands or the hallway outside the gym. Your crew could have chosen to penalize #1 under this rule.

I believe that the crew did an excellent job with end of the game situation. The player just made a mistake which was then compounded by the poor behavior of the coach. Best wishes should any of you end up with assignments during the SoCal Regionals or a State Final.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Very straight-forward and factual report. Thank you.

A couple of rules things for you to contemplate should you wish.

1. There is no NFHS rule extant that a player gaining possession of a ball from a rebound or throw-in after the clock has been stopped requires 3/10ths of a second. The NBA does have such a rule. The NFHS has issued a ruling that the officials need to make some allowance for the catching of the ball in such situations, if there is a timing error, and that allowance is "likely tenths of a second." How many is at the discretion of the officials. Don't confuse this with the NFHS rule requiring more than 3/10ths of a second remaining in a quarter in order for a player to catch and try for goal. How long it takes to catch and shoot is not the same as how long it takes to just catch a ball.

The crew did the right thing by removing some tenths from the clock for the rebound being secured during the immediate time-out request, but don't cite a 0.3 seconds rule for this. The crew could have removed only 0.2, if it believed that was accurate.

2. The correct rule for dealing with FCHS #1 leaving the gym is actually 10-6-5: "The head coach shall not permit team members to leave the bench area and/or playing court for an unauthorized reason." It most certainly applies to more than the five players because it specifies team members. It was crafted a few years ago and is designed to keep the team members in the bench area and prevent them from entering the stands or the hallway outside the gym. Your crew could have chosen to penalize #1 under this rule.



I believe that the crew did an excellent job with end of the game situation. The player just made a mistake which was then compounded by the poor behavior of the coach. Best wishes should any of you end up with assignments during the SoCal Regionals or a State Final.

Same two things I was going to mention. I think the clock should have been closer to ~0.6 given when the TO was acknowledged, but I'd be lying if claimed I could remember that after all the crud that followed. I knew some time had to go back on, and 1.5 seemed plenty reasonable to me. No issues there.

Good summary, C99. Reads like it was cut and paste from a required formal report.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The correct rule for dealing with FCHS #1 leaving the gym is actually 10-6-5: "The head coach shall not permit team members to leave the bench area and/or playing court for an unauthorized reason." It most certainly applies to more than the five players because it specifies team members. It was crafted a few years ago and is designed to keep the team members in the bench area and prevent them from entering the stands or the hallway outside the gym. Your crew could have chosen to penalize #1 under this rule.

Nice citation Nevadaref (Minor point: It's the illegal act of #1 that gets "penalized", it's the head coach that actually gets "penalized" with the technical foul, not #1).

10.5.5 SITUATION A: Airborne shooter A1 is fouled by B1 after the ball is
released on the try. Playing time for the second quarter expires while the unsuccessful
try is in flight. Since no players are required to line up for the free throws,
Team B’s head coach takes the team to the locker room to begin the intermission.
RULING: Team B’s head coach is assessed a direct technical foul for permitting
team members to leave the bench/court for an unauthorized reason. Even though
no time remains on the game clock, the quarter doesn't end until A1’s free throws
are completed; therefore, the technical foul is part of the second quarter. A1 will
attempt the two shooting-foul free throws followed by any Team A member
attempting the two free throws for the technical foul. The Team B head coach has
lost coaching-box privileges for the remainder of the game. The third quarter will
begin with the alternating-possession procedure. (5-6-2 Exception 3)

10.5.5 SITUATION B: A spectator heckles Team A member, A9, while he/she is
sitting on Team A’s bench. A9 leaves the bench area and goes into the stands to
confront the fan. RULING: Team A’s head coach is assessed a direct technical foul
for permitting A9 to leave the bench area for an unauthorized reason. Team B is
awarded two free throws and the ball for a division line throw-in. The Team A
head coach has lost coaching-box privileges for the remainder of the game.

Let's also keep in mind the "unauthorized" part of the rule. Going to the lavatory, or the trainer's room, could certainly be authorized reasons, even if only authorized by the coach. I've never had a player ask me for permission to use the lavatory during a game.

[Nevadaref]

I was going to list that the penalty for 10-6-5 is a direct T to the head coach, but decided that wasn't necessary given that the crew handled everything else so well. I figured that they would know how to penalize this action had they elected to go that route.

Curiously, in this specific situation, the head coach had already been ejected. We could therefore ask to whom the technical foul should be correctly assessed.
Logic would tell us whichever asst coach had assumed the lead of the team, but nothing in the rules dictates this. Have to invoke 2-3.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Note: I don't believe that this happened in this specific situation (the coach was probably informed), but if either the table, or the officials, didn't do what they are, by (NFHS) rule, supposed to do, then there is some blame, in varying amounts, to be shared by the coach, the player, the table, and the officials, for the disaster that followed, mainly on the coach, and the player, but if I were that official who was informed by the table and then failed to inform the coach, I would not have a totally guilt free drive home that night, "Man, I wish I had informed the coach that he had used all of his timeouts". (I don't know what the NCAA rule is.) If the table does what it's supposed to do, and if the officials do what they are supposed to do, then it takes both of them out of the equation, blameless for the subsequent disaster, putting 100% of the blame on the coach and/or the player.

How in the world do you know who was informed or not informed? If they were using the NF procedure to a tee, then they do not call the timeout? What? You realize in playoff games kids "pucker up" and panic when the game is on the line right? You realize that players often make very bad decisions when things are well known right?

And I would not have any guilt what so ever on any level. It is your responsibility as a team to keep track of things in the game. If you don't, then shame on you. If you do not know what timeouts you have used any more than you do not know how many fouls a player has, then same on you. I would feel just fine as I have done many many playoff games and kids and coaches often lose their heads. And I would not care one bit if we told them or not about their timeout situation. Again, one of the dumbest things I think some worry about. They know every other darn thing, we have to tell them they are out of timeouts for them to really know? OK.

Peace

[OKREF]

Did they shoot enough free throws? Weren't there 4 T's?

1 for the extra timeout
2 for the head coach
1 for #1 getting ejected

Shouldn't they have shot 8 free throws?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Did they shoot enough free throws? Weren't there 4 T's?



1 for the extra timeout

2 for the head coach

1 for #1 getting ejected



Shouldn't they have shot 8 free throws?

#1 wasn't ejected.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... we have to tell them they are out of timeouts ...?

By rule, absolutely yes.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

How in the world do you know who was informed or not informed?

It's actually quite simple, if one of the officials informed the team/coach that he had no timeouts left, as required by the rules, then the officials would know 100% for sure who was informed.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It is your responsibility as a team to keep track of things in the game. If you don't, then shame on you.

True, but also, shame on the official (in a hypothetical situation, not like the one in this thread) for not knowing the rule, or (worse) choosing not to do what officials are required to do by the rule, after being informed by the table that the team has used all of their allotted timeouts and then informing the team/coach of the same.

It's not a flexible mechanic, it's a rule.

The scorer shall: Record the time-out information charged to each team (who and
when) and notify a team and its coach, through an official, whenever that team is
granted its final allotted charged time-out.

This isn't some type of courtesy that officials extend to teams and coaches, it's a long recognized rule that most of us have followed dozens (maybe more) of times. In my thirty-six years, as the calling official granting, and reporting, the final allotted timeout, and being informed as such by the table, I have never, ever, failed to inform the head coach, either during, or immediately after, the timeout, or, failing to get the attention of the head coach without interrupting his huddle, informing the assistant coach. As the non calling official, if the situation presents itself, I have asked my partner, "Did you inform the coach?".

If the officials are informed by the table and they choose not to inform the team/coach, then they have simply kicked a rule (and in 99.9% (maybe more) of all cases, this doesn't result in any negative ramifications).

Now, some officials do go beyond the rule and extend the courtesy of communicating to teams/coaches how many timeouts (before using all of them) they have remaining, "Coach, you have one sixty second timeout left", but that's outside of the rules, isn't required by the NFHS, and is more of a personal and/or local custom (maybe for building good rapport with the coaches). I don't do that, and my local board officials are instructed not to do that. It's a classic "When in Rome ..." situation.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

If one of the officials informed the coach that he had no timeouts left, as required by the rules, then the officials would know 100% for sure who was informed.



Shame on your for not doing what officials are required to do by rule, after being informed by the table that the team has used all of their allotted timeouts and then informing the coach of the same.

It's not a flexible mechanic, it's a rule.

We do it, but if it's missed it doesn't relieve the team of having the responsibility of keeping track. One of my teams had 6 assistant coaches last night, after all.

Like Rut, I wouldn't lose much sleep.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rich

We do it, but if it's missed it doesn't relieve the team of having the responsibility of keeping track. Like Rut, I wouldn't lose much sleep.

Agree that it's also on the team/coaches, especially in a high school varsity game.

Rich wouldn't lose much sleep over kicking this rule that resulted in a disaster at the end of a game.

Neither would I. Some, but not much.

My worst call of the season, and it wasn't even my call. Late in a game my partner (a highly regarded state tournament official) kicks a rule regarding a double free throw violation and how to penalize the violation. I wasn't aware of his call, because I was keeping my eye on my own primary, but I could tell from his voice and body language that he was only 95% certain of the call, especially in his dealing with two questions from the coach. After the game, discussing the call, we discovered that he kicked the rule, costing the losing team (in an overtime game) a free throw, maybe two free throws, and the arrow, near the end of regulation. I should have approached him with a "What did you have?" which would have saved us from kicking the rule. Instead, I just let him make his call, make his explanation to the coach, and I just put the ball in play as if he knew 100% what he was doing. The losing coach politely approached us in the locker room after the game with a question and we had to admit that we kicked the call. Lose sleep? No. But I could have been a better partner.

Retrospective, and some feelings of remorse, guilt, conscience, or responsibility (I couldn't come up with the right word, so I used four, but these words are too strong so take them down a notch to get my meaning) after kicking a call are good things for officials. It's makes us better officials and demonstrates that we care about doing our jobs well, in the past, in the present, and in the future.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You realize in playoff games kids "pucker up" and panic when the game is on the line right? You realize that players often make very bad decisions when things are well known right?

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Rich

#1 wasn't ejected.

Ahh, ok. My mistake.

[A Pennsylvania Coach]

Originally Posted by U99

He continues coming at the official finally snapping his head and yelling "bulls**t". (So much for the newspaper and CIF report of no profanity)

Unless I'm confusing this with some other story, I believe the coach initially got a three-game suspension and it was reduced to one, because the coach didn't use profanity, according to the person in charge of deciding the penalty.

I'm assuming what you posted was similar to or a copy of your game report--disappointing that they didn't back you up on the profanity.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It's actually quite simple, if one of the officials informed the team/coach that he had no timeouts left, as required by the rules, then the officials would know 100% for sure who was informed.

How in the heck would an official have any idea who is informed once you tell a coach or tell and assistant their timeout situation? I am not staying in the darn huddle for them to tell everyone what they are going to tell them. That is about as dumb as anything I have heard on this site if you think any official is hanging out to figure out if all team members (who might not even be next to the coach in the first place). That is like telling me that the official knows the play that was called during the timeout. There is no way unless you hanging out in the huddle to know what was said to players.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It's not a flexible mechanic, it's a rule.

Yes a rule that has no specifics on how to tell them or what to say. Or even where to tell them. So your assessment of this is quite overstated. And if you are worried about that, then you will just have to be worried. I could not care less either way. Been in some high profile situations in my career and the last thing I am worried about is what a coach is told about in a game about their timeout situations.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

This isn't some type of courtesy that officials extend to teams and coaches, it's a long recognized rule that most of us have followed dozens (maybe more) of times. In my thirty-six years, as the calling official granting, and reporting, the final allotted timeout, and being informed as such by the table, I have never, ever, failed to inform the head coach, either during, or immediately after, the timeout, or, failing to get the attention of the head coach without interrupting his huddle, informing the assistant coach. As the non calling official, if the situation presents itself, I have asked my partner, "Did you inform the coach?".

I have been doing this for 20 and never had many officials worry about this. Again usually the table people are telling us when they have many timeouts left and it is long before they are out in the game. Usually there are situations that are communicated related to how many "30 second timeouts" are left.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

If the officials are informed by the table and they choose not to inform the team/coach, then they have simply kicked a rule (and in 99.9% (maybe more) of all cases, this doesn't result in any negative ramifications).

First of all, no one here brought up anything about this but you (it appears). That was not the issue of this thread or even the accusation of the team. You are the only one making this part of this an issue. The issue was whether or not the player requested a timeout, which appears to be the case in several videos about the topic. But somehow you are turned this (like you do other things) into something that has nothing to do with the actual topic. Congrats.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Now, some officials do go beyond the rule and extend the courtesy of communicating to teams/coaches how many timeouts (before using all of them) they have remaining, "Coach, you have one sixty second timeout left", but that's outside of the rules, isn't required by the NFHS, and is more of a personal and/or local custom (maybe for building good rapport with the coaches). I don't do that, and my local board officials are instructed not to do that. It's a classic "When in Rome ..." situation.

Yes, that is true, but that is not what appears to have happened her. And I do not care what your local board does, because I do not work for one entity that tells us anything other than the IHSA. And they do not assign most of our games. And I have yet to see an email or comment about how officials handled a timeout situation when a team is out as an emphasis of doing our job.

Peace

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And I do not care what your local board does, because I do not work for one entity that tells us anything other than the IHSA. And they do not assign most of our games. And I have yet to see an email or comment about how officials handled a timeout situation when a team is out as an emphasis of doing our job.

But, but…I thought……One Rule, One Interpretation, right?

Oh wait, I'm not forced to pay homage to IAABO. Whew!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk