Rush Onto The Court ...

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

NCAAW ... A.R. 339. Team B leads, 67-66. A1’s two-point try for goal is successful, but there is no indication that time has expired. Assuming that the successful try is a game-ending and winning goal: Bench personnel from Team A go onto the playing court to celebrate; RULING: When the celebration causes a delay by preventing the ball from being promptly made live or prevents continuous play: One bench technical foul shall be assessed to the offending team and counts toward the team-foul total. This technical foul is also charged indirectly to the head coach and counts toward the coach’s ejection. Any Team B member shall attempt two free throws and play shall resume with a throw-in by Team B at a designated spot at the division line opposite the scorers' table. When the celebration does not delay or interfere with play, the celebration shall be ignored.

If this can be extrapolated to a NFHS high school game, it sounds more like a 10-5-2 Bench Technical (bench personnel must not enter the court unless by permission of an official, penalty includes an indirect technical foul to the head coach) than a 10-2-2 Team Technical (more than five participating, penalty does not include an indirect technical foul to the head coach).

I don't yet have the IAABO Refresher Exam answer sheet, but the reference citation sheet given to study group members by IAABO points to 10-2-2 Team Technical.

IAABO Refresher Exams are always based on NFHS rules and interpretations. I wonder if this is an IAABO error? It happens almost every year.

bob jenkins (and other Forum members): How would you rule in a NFHS (not IAABO) high school game? 10-5-2 Bench Technical or 10-2-2 Team Technical?

Originally Posted by BillyMac

61) With Team B leading 51 to 50, Team A scores with eight seconds left in the game. A-6 and A-7 rush onto the court to congratulate the shooter. This occurs while B-1 is trying to complete a throw-in to B-2. The official rules one technical foul against Team A, awards Team B two free throws and the ball for a division-line throw-in. Is this correct?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Another problem question from the 2022-23 IAABO Refresher Exam:

61) With Team B leading 51 to 50, Team A scores with eight seconds left in the game. A-6 and A-7 rush onto the court to congratulate the shooter. This occurs while B-1 is trying to complete a throw-in to B-2. The official rules one technical foul against Team A, awards Team B two free throws and the ball for a division-line throw-in. Is this correct?

...

Originally Posted by BillyMac

If this can be extrapolated to a NFHS high school game, it sounds more like a 10-5-2 Bench Technical (bench personnel must not enter the court unless by permission of an official, penalty includes an indirect technical foul to the head coach) than a 10-2-2 Team Technical (more than five participating, penalty does not include an indirect technical foul to the head coach).

I don't yet have the IAABO Refresher Exam answer sheet, but the reference citation sheet given to study group members by IAABO points to 10-2-2 Team Technical.

IAABO Refresher Exams are always based on NFHS rules and interpretations. I wonder if this is an IAABO error? It happens almost every year.

bob jenkins (and other Forum members): How would you rule in a NFHS (not IAABO) high school game? 10-5-2 Bench Technical or 10-2-2 Team Technical?

Hasn't the content and context of several responses (other than Ilya's) already answered your question?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Hasn't the content and context of several responses already answered your question?

It would have been helpful if Raymond had replied to my guess (with a question mark) of "six players on the court" to his cryptic post.

Originally Posted by Raymond

Put the 2 rules side-by-side. Then think back over your 40 years of officiating about which rule is something we as officials always try to prevent from being violated b/c we tend to blame ourselves when it happens.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Allowing six players on the court?

[Raymond]

My post wasn't cryptic. You asked a question (I think, hard to tell sometimes) and I posed a questioned in return that should have led to you making a determination which rule applies to the situation posed in the initial post.

I constantly preach to the officials in my association that we need to actually think about why we make decisions on the court. Spoon-feeding answers stunts that growth.

I train to help handle situations properly on the court, not to pass a quiz/test.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

My post wasn't cryptic. You asked a question and I posed a questioned in return that should have led to you making a determination which rule applies to the situation posed in the initial post.

I actually enjoyed and was challenged by your "questioning" post. And I wasn't upset that you didn't just simply give an answer.

My answer was that officials often try to avoid having six players on the court, and except in rare cases where players "dash" off the bench, if six players are discovered during a live ball on the court immediately after a timeout, intermission, or substitution, officials often have themselves to blame by rushing the administration of inbounds play.

Was that the answer that you expected from me, because you never replied to confirm or deny?

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... how does one decide between a 10-5-2 Bench Technical or 10-2-2 Team Technical?

Originally Posted by Raymond

Hasn't the content and context of several responses already answered your question?

Originally Posted by Raymond

Put the 2 rules side-by-side. Then think back over your 40 years of officiating about which rule is something we as officials always try to prevent from being violated b/c we tend to blame ourselves when it happens.

If you accepted my answer, it implies that you support a 10-2-2 Team Technical penalty.

If you rejected my answer, that implies that you support a 10-5-2 Bench Technical penalty.

I already know that your don't support ilyazhito's 10-3 Substitute Technical penalty, and neither do I.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I actually enjoyed and was challenged by your "questioning" post. And I wasn't upset that you didn't just simply give an answer.

My answer was that officials often try to avoid having six players on the court, and except in rare cases where players "dash" off the bench, if six players are discovered during a live ball on the court immediately after a timeout, intermission, or substitution, officials often have themselves to blame by rushing the administration of inbounds play.

Was that the answer that you expected from me, because you never replied to confirm or deny?

...

And I'm not going to. Are bench personnel who spontaneously enter the court to celebrate a last second goal while the ball is still live:

A) participating illegally?

or

B) illegally on the court?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Are bench personnel who spontaneously enter the court to celebrate a last second goal while the ball is still live:
A) participating illegally?
B) illegally on the court?

Using your recent example of assistant coaches (bench personnel) doing such, I would say illegally on the court (players and coaches) thus it's the 10-5-2 Bench Technical penalty. Right?

Why did you lead me down another path?

Originally Posted by Raymond

Put the 2 rules side-by-side. Then think back over your 40 years of officiating about which rule is something we as officials always try to prevent from being violated b/c we tend to blame ourselves when it happens.

I've never really been worried about bench personnel who spontaneously and illegally enter the court to celebrate a last second goal while the ball is still live, and if it ever happened in my game I would never blame myself, nor blame my partner.

On the other hand if six players are discovered during a live ball on the court immediately after a timeout, intermission, or substitution, officials often have themselves to blame by rushing the administration of inbounds play.

Did I answer your question incorrectly, or did you change your mind about the rule citation and penalty?

Or am I totally confused?

If the NFHS answer is really 10-5-2 Bench Technical and not 10-2-2 Team Technical, as stated in the IAABO reference citation offered to study group members, then IAABO may have an answer sheet problem and leave itself open for complaints and be forced to offer a correction.