Disconcerting ?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I'll leave it up the other Forum members to find the citations and interpretations that back up JRutledge's assertion that one can't call a distracting violation on bench personal. I've already done my due diligence as an esteemed Forum member.

The proper interpretation hinges on the NFHS definition of "opponent" (found 152 times in the rulebook but no specific definition).

I will put it this way, we have never had anyone in my area assert that you should penalize a bench for disconcertion. This has been addressed multiple ways over the years and basically tells the bench to "knock it off" based on a free throw situation and then if they do not comply use the tools you have to stop it. This OP situation was not about a free throw, but saying something from the bench to players playing on the floor. And if that was the case we would have issues every single game and Ts if we always addressed some situation with the bench for simply being active. There is nothing especially illegal about clapping. Now if they are taunting that is different, but not what I am reading.

I am watching college basketball and see players in the first half of games shoot the ball in front of the defensive team bench and the bench might raise up or yell something. That is very typical. Just do not interfere with the game or come onto the court where we have to see someone avoid you or alter their paths because you are in the way.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... we have never had anyone in my area assert that you should penalize a bench for disconcertion. This has been addressed multiple ways over the years and basically tells the bench to "knock it off" based on a free throw situation and then if they do not comply use the tools you have to stop it ...

When in Rome ...

One problem in Rome: You give bench personnel (especially in the first half) one free "pass". Free throw shooter is going through his routine preparing to shoot (only one, or first of multiple shots) and at the exact point of release everybody on the opposing bench yells "MISS" at the top of their lungs which obviously startles and distracts the shooter who throws an airball. After that the Roman official tells the bench to "knock it off", but the shot still missed, he and his team still didn't get the point, and he still doesn't get a "do-over" for the missed airball (as he would with a delayed violation for a distraction from an opponent).

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

When in Rome ...

One problem in Rome: You give bench personnel (especially in the first half) one free "pass". Free throw shooter is going through his routine preparing to shoot (only one, or first of multiple shots) and at the exact point of release everybody on the opposing bench yells "MISS" at the top of their lungs which obviously startles and distracts the shooter who throws an airball. After that the Roman official tells the bench to "knock it off", but the shot still missed, he and his team still didn't get the point, and he still doesn't get a "do-over" for the missed airball (as he would with a delayed violation for a distraction from an opponent).

I did not say a thing about giving someone a "pass" I said that it would not be addressed as a violation. And depending on the half they are on the other end of the court. As stated this is not specifically addressed in the rules or interpretation as to who is under the rules. All FT violations are based on the players on the court, I think if bench personnel was to be included in this then they could easily say so. No such interpretation at any level exists.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I did not say a thing about giving someone a "pass" I said that it would not be addressed as a violation.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... tells the bench to "knock it off" based on a free throw situation and then if they do not comply use the tools you have to stop it.

How are you going to tell a team to "knock it off" if they haven't done it yet?

Sounds like your "knock it off" will occur after the first instance of bench personnel yelling, distracting, and startling; all leading to an airball.

Your statement seems to indicate that they will do it once and then you will tell them to "knock it off", and at that point in time you will describe to them any penalties that they may be charged with if they "do not comply" and the improper behavior continues.

Even if you gave them an "oral" warning of future unsporting technical fouls, the air ball still doesn't count, and there's still no "do-over", as many here on the Forum advocate based based on the word "opponent" and "unhindered".

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

How are you going to tell a team to "knock it off" if they haven't done it yet?

Sounds like your "knock it off" will occur after the first instance of bench personnel yelling, distracting, and startling; all leading to an airball.

Your statement seems to indicate that they will do it once and then you will tell them to "knock it off", and at that point in time you will describe to them any penalties that they may be charged with if they do "not comply" and the improper behavior continues.

You read way too much into stuff. I simply said that if the bench is doing something during an FT that might seem out of the ordinary, you just tell them to knock it off. And I felt they were doing something and did not stop, I would only consider a technical foul, not a violation. But during live play, better man up if that bothers you, and all they are doing is making noise.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... if the bench is doing something during an FT that might seem out of the ordinary, you just tell them to knock it off.

While I now see your point (because you took the time to word it better), if the yelling "MISS", and the startling came at the split second of the release, it's too late yell "knock it off" to have it be effective for that specific shot attempt (too late to be proactive, can only be reactive).

I believe that you are referring to the bench yelling "Miss", etc., for a few seconds after the ball is at the disposal of the free throw shooter (allowing one to be proactive rather than reactive).

I was talking about a last split second, startling, surprising, heart stopping, adrenaline pumping, "MISS" yell. In my case I believe that the shooter deserves the same delayed violation do-over for a bench distraction that that is allowed for a player distraction.

You define "opponent" different than me, and define "unhindered" different than me. Until the NFHS does a better job defining these two concepts, we have to politely and professionally agree to disagree.

[JRutledge]

I have never heard players on or off the court say "miss" during a free throw. They usually do other things that could cause noise and just making noise is not enough for me. You keep focusing on this as if I have to agree with you the problem here (what is with people on this site sometimes with that?). I am saying that if they are doing something that might be annoying or vocal to get some attention, then I will address the behavior if I see the need. Usually, this is never an issue with anyone. I do not go around looking for these kinds of things to worry about. Apparently, you do.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... the bench yelling "Miss", etc., for a few seconds after the ball is at the disposal of the free throw shooter (allowing one to be proactive rather than reactive) ...

If this is the case, I'm also being proactive, sounding my whistle, and telling the bench to "knock it off".

But for me, my "first choice" for a penalty (after sounding my whistle, and telling the bench to "knock it off) will be a delayed violation rather than a technical foul, however if this unsporting behavior continues further into the game, I will definitely consider technical fouls.

2001-2002 NFHS Rulebook Points Of Emphasis #2 Disconcertion During Free Throws: ... If persistent, or deemed unsporting, the team/player may be penalized with a technical foul.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

You define "opponent" different than me, and define "unhindered" different than me. Until the NFHS does a better job defining these two concepts, we have to politely and professionally agree to disagree.

There is no definition in rules who is an "opponent" to know the context. If they said player or bench personnel which are defined, then we would have a clearer picture. You are making a leap as to who can do things when the current rules usually define many things by who can or cannot do something. Not sure we need to agree to disagree on anything when you have not shown that your assessment applies to the situation we are discussing. I simply said what we have discussed where I live and how to handle this.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This OP situation was not about a free throw, but saying something from the bench to players playing on the floor ...

Agree, but JRutledge was one of the posters who broached the situation of a free throw and it having nothing to do with bench personnel.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The rule for disconcertion only addresses this during a free throw and honestly has nothing to do with the bench ...