Warning ???

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

So now it's time to turn your attention to the IAABO folks to explain their answer.

April 8, 2021

To IAABO Co-Coordinators of Interpreters

Regarding two NFHS quiz questions from the recent IAABO Inside the Lines bulletin:

1. B1 places both hands on Dribbler A1 and is charged with a hand checking foul. As the official is reporting the foul, the Team B head coach asks, “What did the B1 do?” The official replies, that B1 had two hands on A1. The head coach of Team B screams “That’s a terrible call!” The official should:
A. Call an unsporting technical foul on the head coach.
B. Ignore the Situation.
C. Issue a behavior warning on the head coach.
D. A & C.
Answer: 1. D-10-6-Penalty.

2. As A1 is cutting through the lane and yells “get your hands off of me!” Moments later, the assistant coach yells “Get their (expletive) hands off us!”
The official should:
A. Ignore the Assistant Coach.
B. Call a technical foul on the Assistant Coach.
C. Issue a behavior warning on the Assistant Coach.
D. B & C.
Answer: 2. D-10-6-Penalty

I fully understand and agree that once a bench technical foul has been issued to bench personnel that no warning may thereafter be issued and that any subsequent poor bench behavior is simply a bench technical foul, in other words, a team loses the privilege of a bench behavior warning to bench personnel once a bench technical foul has been issued.

Citations confirming this “lose the privilege of a behavior warning” ruling include:

4-48-2 Warning For Coach/Team Conduct
For the first violation of Rule 10-6-1, the official must warn the head coach unless the offense is judged to be major, in which case a technical foul must be assessed.

Case Book 10.5.1 Situation A. Play: At halftime, as the teams, coaches and officials are making their way through a hallway to the dressing room, a Team A member inappropriately addresses one of the officials. Ruling: The official must decide if the offense is major. Under 4-48, if not deemed to be major and neither a warning nor technical has been charged (direct or indirect) to the head coach, the bench personnel could be issued a warning. If a warning is issued, this would be reported to both teams, recorded in the scorebook, and the head coach would not lose coaching-box privileges. If the offense was judged to be major or a warning or technical has already been issued to the head coach, a technical foul is charged to the team member and is also charged indirectly to the head coach resulting in the loss of coaching-box privileges.

I have a problem with the quiz ruling to “issue a behavior warning” on the head coach/assistant coach (bench) in addition to the charged bench technical foul.

Does IAABO want us to "issue a behavior warning” after a bench technical foul with no previous bench behavior warning to stress that a bench technical foul without a previous bench behavior warning means that the team has lost the privilege of getting a bench behavior warning later in that game?

Does "issue a behavior warning" really mean that the official instructs the scorekeeper to write a bench behavior warning, a warning that really wasn't given, in the scorebook?

I would like to understand the basis for this "issue a behavior warning" in addition to the charged bench technical foul ruling.

Please cite any relevant NFHS rules, or interpretations, to help me understand this IAABO quiz ruling.

Thank you.

BillyMac

[BillyMac]

From IAABO Co-Coordinator of Interpreters:

Thanks for contacting us. We appreciate the time and effort you put into narrative below.

I edit those quizzes and meant to change those answers.

You are correct, Question #1 the answer should be A; In Question 2 the answer should be B

Officials do not need to issue an additional warning after assessing a technical foul.

I will get these answers corrected.

Thanks again for taking time to review the “Inside the Lines” and participating in the quizzes.

[Mike Goodwin]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

From IAABO Co-Coordinators of Interpreters:

Thanks for contacting us. We appreciate the time and effort you put into narrative below.

I edit those quizzes and meant to change those answers.

You are correct, Question #1 the answer should be A; In Question 2 the answer should be B

Officials do not need to issue an additional warning after assessing a technical foul.

I will get these answers corrected.

Thanks again for taking time to review the “Inside the Lines” and participating in the quizzes.

Full marks for a good response time; slight deduction for not editing the answers before publication.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mike Goodwin

Full marks for a good response time; slight deduction for not editing the answers before publication.

NFHS has warts. IAABO has warts. BillyMac has warts. Fact of life. Nobody's perfect.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mike Goodwin

... slight deduction for not editing the answers before publication.

If one is going to publish something that will go out to 15,000 IAABO officials, one would think that one should be sure that the information was 100% correct, possibly asking others to edit and double check the information.

Back when I was teaching middle school science, I was meticulous about double and triple checking lesson plans, handouts, lab instructions, tests (questions and answers), and quizzes (questions and answers). Even spelling errors. Middle school kids just love catching teachers making mistakes.

"Hey Mr. BillyMac, CaCO2 isn't the formula for calcium carbonate."