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

[rbruno]

Had a varsity HS game years ago when the table told me Team A had 1 timeout left. I informed the assistant of Team A they had 1 left. Later in the fourth quarter Team A called a timeout, I went to the Table and reported and the table informed me that Team A had no more timeouts. I now become the villain of course. Taught me a lesson to never tell either team how many timeouts they have left except when they have none. I would assume the officials knew that that team had no more timeouts. Can you ignore the request (Google Paul Silas Celtics triple overtime game in 1976), and the aforementioned Chris Webber game) knowing that the team has no timeouts and it would result in a technical foul? Just sayin...

[Adam]

Originally Posted by rbruno

Had a varsity HS game years ago when the table told me Team A had 1 timeout left. I informed the assistant of Team A they had 1 left. Later in the fourth quarter Team A called a timeout, I went to the Table and reported and the table informed me that Team A had no more timeouts. I now become the villain of course. Taught me a lesson to never tell either team how many timeouts they have left except when they have none. I would assume the officials knew that that team had no more timeouts. Can you ignore the request (Google Paul Silas Celtics triple overtime game in 1976), and the aforementioned Chris Webber game) knowing that the team has no timeouts and it would result in a technical foul? Just sayin...

No, you cannot ignore the request. There's specific instruction not to do so.

You'll note that no one except other officials ever really questions whether this should be called. No one even knows who the officials were in that Webber game. You ignore it, and the other coach is going to have a right to go ballistic. I'd much rather explain that #3 requested a timeout than explain why I ignored what was right in front of me.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rbruno

Can you ignore the request ... knowing that the team has no timeouts and it would result in a technical foul? Just sayin...

Do your ignore contact fouls too just because they are dumb fouls, especially when the other team is in the bonus?

Do you ignore when a player steps OOB even though they had plenty of room to stay inbounds but were not paying attention?

[bucky]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Do your ignore contact fouls too just because they are dumb fouls, especially when the other team is in the bonus?

Do you ignore when a player steps OOB even though they had plenty of room to stay inbounds but were not paying attention?

I get your point however, there are times when ignoring rules is prescribed. Specific situations and intentions may require it.

Right or wrong, I can easily see where many officials would have ignored this alleged TO request.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by bucky

I get your point however, there are times when ignoring rules is prescribed. Specific situations and intentions may require it.

Right or wrong, I can easily see where many officials would have ignored this alleged TO request.

Alleged?

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by bucky

Right or wrong, I can easily see where many inexperienced officials would have incorrectly ignored this alleged TO request.

Went ahead and amended that statement for you. And to echo Rich, Alleged? There was a TO request. It was recognized and granted. End of that part of the story.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bucky

I get your point however, there are times when ignoring rules is prescribed. Specific situations and intentions may require it.

Right or wrong, I can easily see where many officials would have ignored this alleged TO request.

Those situations where ignoring the rules is prescribed are for when the team violating the rules would benefit from having it enforced...where calling the rules as written would not satisfy the intent of the rules but would do the opposite.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by bucky

I get your point however, there are times when ignoring rules is prescribed. Specific situations and intentions may require it.

Right or wrong, I can easily see where many officials would have ignored this alleged TO request.

Alternative facts?

[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 as well as the snack bar and bathrooms. 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. 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 or bench area is for an unauthorized reason. (10-6-6). An assistant coach retrieved #1 and he returned to the game as a player following the time-out. The crew was not going to specifically ask the reason why he left, as there may have been a legal reason.

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.

[U99]

Mark Ziegler from the San Diego Tribune posts this on his twitter feed https://mobile.twitter.com/Jack10Spe...680832/video/1

Crazy End to San Diego H.S. Basketball Game | NBC 7 San Diego

sandiegoinformer.com/37130/playoff-game-ends-in-chaos-coach-ejected-Chris-Webber-moment-foothills-Christian-v-st-Augustine-San-diego-videos/

High School Basketball Team Loses After Getting Charged with 3 Technical Fouls | Bleacher Report

www.sbnation.com/look it/2017/3/2/14792048/san-diego-high-school-basketball-chris-webber-timeout-chaos-video

VIDEO: Wild Calif. playoff finish includes a Chris Webber moment and coach ejection | | USA Today High School Sports

I think that's all of them lol.

[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.

[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.

[BigT]

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 as well as the snack bar and bathrooms. 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. 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 or bench area is for an unauthorized reason. (10-6-6). An assistant coach retrieved #1 and he returned to the game as a player following the time-out. The crew was not going to specifically ask the reason why he left, as there may have been a legal reason.

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.

Thanks for coming here and telling us the rest of the story!