New one last night

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

You said they were going lose anyway so why do something he "could" do. I'm not saying you're wrong, but the way you worded it seems off.

This rule seems to need amending as it can be taken advantage of, which isn't in the spirit of the game.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Any supervisor I have ever worked for is not going to be happy if he gets a phone call from the losing coach asking why they were given a T instead of a delay warning in the OP's situation. Contrarily, no one can argue with a straight face that this is not a delay of game situation.

If you think an unsporting T is the better option in this situation than a delay warning - I don't know what to tell you. You are breaking into jail by going straight to a T here, and possibly misapplying the rules as well.

[Altor]

Is this play that much different from the case play where the teams hits the ball into the stands to induce a DoG warning? Doesn't that play give the official to options to assess a technical foul or just let the clock expire while the ball is retrieved?

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by Altor

Is this play that much different from the case play where the teams hits the ball into the stands to induce a DoG warning? Doesn't that play give the official to options to assess a technical foul or just let the clock expire while the ball is retrieved?

Key is "gives the official the option." Just because you have the option to do something doesn't mean it's the best choice.

[tw1ns]

Originally Posted by Altor

Is this play that much different from the case play where the teams hits the ball into the stands to induce a DoG warning? Doesn't that play give the official to options to assess a technical foul or just let the clock expire while the ball is retrieved?

That's kinda what went through my mind as it was happening...recalling that play and the intent that went with it. I probably would have just let the clock run out, but one of the home team players starting grabbing and wrestling him for the ball....thats when i issued the T.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Any supervisor I have ever worked for is not going to be happy if he gets a phone call from the losing coach asking why they were given a T instead of a delay warning in the OP's situation. Contrarily, no one can argue with a straight face that this is not a delay of game situation.



If you think an unsporting T is the better option in this situation than a delay warning - I don't know what to tell you. You are breaking into jail by going straight to a T here, and possibly misapplying the rules as well.

I'm not saying give the tech. I'm asking you that stuff based on what you said. Why even bring up the idea of possibly giving the unsportsmanlike?

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Nevadaref]

There is more going on here. Perhaps the point differential in the game matters for a tie-breaker or playoff seeding.

What this team did was more than merely knock the ball away following a goal. They grabbed it, deliberately held it, and caused a confrontation with the opponent when he rightfully tried to obtain it. I would issue a player technical foul in this situation for delay of game. The rules book language is something akin to preventing the ball from being made promptly live.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

... more than merely knock the ball away following a goal. They grabbed it, deliberately held it, and caused a confrontation with the opponent when he rightfully tried to obtain it. I would issue a player technical foul in this situation for delay of game ...

I would rather go the unsporting; or preventing the ball from being made live promptly or from being put in play route.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

There is more going on here. Perhaps the point differential in the game matters for a tie-breaker or playoff seeding.

What this team did was more than merely knock the ball away following a goal. They grabbed it, deliberately held it, and caused a confrontation with the opponent when he rightfully tried to obtain it. I would issue a player technical foul in this situation for delay of game. The rules book language is something akin to preventing the ball from being made promptly live.

Agree. When the player refused to release the ball, it moved from being a simple delay to preventing the ball from becoming live..

10-4 PLAYER TECHNICAL
A player must not
ART. 5...Delay the game by acts such as:
a. Preventing the ball from being made live promptly or from being put in play