Coach Interference
 

An interesting play in the clip linked below. (Sorry for no embedding) End of game team inbounding from approximately the 28 foot mark. Opposing coach in coaches box, but clearly interferes with a play. Not only waiving his arms in the vision of the inbounder, but the the ball then actually hits him. None of the officials on the court saw the coach get hit live. The ball then continues and is caught by the inbounding team, who calls another timeout, and another inbound ensues without issue.

Preventatively, the covering official probably should have made sure the coach was removed from the play, but as it is, the play went unpunished.

We can all have our own opinion on the intent of the coach, but from a strictly rules standpoint, and not judging intent, what options would the officials have if they observed the contact? For a coach who is legally coaching in his box, and has not been asked to move, is there justification for a T? (again, if we don't consider the intent of the Coach's actions) Do we have to call this OOB because the thrown ball touched an object (coach) who is out of bounds? Has anyone seen this before?


https://www.nfhsnetwork.com/clips/uc...a1738364872046

Rewatching the play, the coach actually does leave the coach's box while jumping around. That said, for the sake of the discussion, let's assume that he didn't. Same questions-

That's a great clip. Don't know that I've seen that before.

I dug up the game and watched a little more. The coach is definitely an *******. That much is obvious, so I definitely wouldn't rule out intent here, as he clearly is all prepped to play the "Who me?" defense. He even has his hands in the air in the "Ladies and gentlemen, I am not a criminal" pose on the ensuing inbounds out of the timeout, as the official is simply trying to get him to move away from the inbounds spot.

Whether we like it or not, many throw-ins take place IN the coaching box. Hell, one of the four designated frontcourt throw-in spots IS the coaching box -- which happened on successive plays here. So whether he's properly in the box is not really relevant here. If the throw-in is in the box too, then the coach had better relocate.

The coach is also eager to make a meal out of the spot on the second throw-in (not in the clip), desperate for the second throw-in to be on the endline. And the official does a great job, again, seemingly patiently explaining the spot logic to the coach, who just won't stop and wants no part of it.

He is clearly trying to play the "I'm just a zany and passionate coach" character and using it as a veil to be an irritant. Can you tell I'm not a fan of the 15 seconds I've seen from him?

Back to your questions: If I observed this, I would rule it OOB on Black because the coach touched it. White bears no responsibility for a member of opposing bench personnel touching the ball. So we'll have another throw-in at the same spot. At which point I would kindly warn the coach not to be anywhere in the area code of the throw-in, as there can be no possibility of this happening again. And then we're going technicals after that if he refuses to comply or somehow manages to do this again.

I'm not even bothering with the rules book on this one. This is Trial Law.

The coach acted like an ass, left his box, and (likely deliberately) interfered with a throw-in. That's a paddlin'.

From your descriptions I believed this coach was a supreme jerk trying to interfere with the players. But then on watching the clip I saw that what he is is someone treating the players like morons, showing them, "Do like this! And keep doing like this!" and was not facing the thrower-in. Nevertheless, it seems his team may have gained an advantage by his actions, and officials should've done something in advance to give the thrower-in space from him. He could've taken a giant step backward and still been able to do his jumping jacks gesture without being in the way of the throw. But if no official made him do it, I don't like the presumption that he should've known better. If the touch was seen, inasmuch as basketball doesn't allow advantage play in general, how can you not stop play?

Whack!
 

A) I would have instructed B-HC to sit down before Administering the Throw-in.

B) B-HC's actions in Team B's Coaching Box after W00 received the Ball for the Throw-in B-HC should have been Whacked!


But, lets look at this Play:

1a) I am going to make an educated assumption that this is a Three-Person Officiating Crew.

1b) Based upon the educated assumption that I made in (1a) the C and T are grossly out of position for this Throw-in.

2a) The C should have been positioned at the Division Line so as to be able to look through the 'stack'.

2b) The T should have been Out-of-Bounds along the Sideline, thereby insuring that B-HC would have had his tuchus firmly seated on Team B's Bench, before Administering the Ball to W00.

3a) Once the Ball had been Inbounded by W00, the T was in a perfect position to see the Pushing foul by B1 against W27. I am gobsmacked (:eek:), that instead of charging B1 with the Pushing Foul for pushing W27 Out-of-Bounds and awarding W27 2 FTAs, the T incorrectly Ruled a 'force out' (which the NBA did away with at least 45 if not 50 years ago, ��) and gave the Ball to Team W for a Designated Spot Throw-in on its Endline nearest where W27 was pushed Out-of-Bounds.

3b) And during the Throw-in the C stood like a statue during the entire Play, :eek:.


Esteemed Forum Member Daryl H. Long and I had this near exact Situation in a YBOA Girls' National Championship elimination game in the early 2000s which I know that I have described in previous threads in the Forum over the decades, :p.

MTD, Sr.

19th, 20th, 21st ...
 

Decades?

No!

Centuries?

Yes!

Why insist on sitting? Is there not floor space to stand away from the sideline such that interference like this could not happen? Or are things actually so tight in the gym that a step back would have him fall on or over the bench?

Does a coach's box in basketball extend indefinitely "away" as in baseball?

Robert Goodwin:

It is not the 'coach's box'. It is the Coaching Box. One will not see a 'coach's box' mentioned in the Rules but one will see the Coaching Box defined in the Rules.

The Coaching Box is to be used by a HC to: i) coach his/her Team (primary purpose), ii) Request a TO, iii) make a CE request, iv) make an AP Arrow correction request, or v) make a Throw-in correction request.

The Coaching Box is not to be used to interfere with an Opponent's Throw-in.

MTD, Sr.

I don't see an answer to my question. Is the coach allowed to stand farther away from the sideline, and thus achieve purpose #1, albeit looking silly gesturing, "Wave your arms like this, guys." while running no risk of interfering with the throw-in? Or is the coach constrained either by rule or in this case by layout of the court to standing within a certain distance of the sideline?

The coach cannot stand behind the bench, if that is what you are asking (I didn't watch the video)

Depth Of Coaching Box ...
 

While I agree that the coach may not stand behind the bench during a timeout, I can't find a rule reference for any depth restriction while "coaching".

Rule 1 - Section 13
Team Bench Locations, Coaching Box, Time-Out Area
ART. 1 The location of each team’s bench must be designated by game management. It is recommended that the benches for team members and coaches of both teams be placed along that side of the court on which the scorer’s and timer’s table is located.
ART. 2 The coaching box must be outlined outside the side of the court on which the scorer’s and timer’s table and team benches are located. The area must be bounded by a line drawn 28 feet from the end line towards the division line. At this point, a line drawn from the sideline toward the team bench becomes the end of the coaching box going towards the end line. These lines must be located off the court and be 2 inches wide. The same directions should be followed for the other side of the scorer’s and timer’s table.
ART. 3 The time-out area must be the area inside an imaginary rectangle formed by the boundaries of the sideline (including the bench), end line, and an imaginary line extended from the free-throw lane line nearest the bench area meeting an imaginary line extended from the coaching-box line.

Hmm. I've never really considered a coach standing behind the bench. I don't have a rule book handy at the moment, is that specified in rule 10 that he cannot be behind the bench? I don't see a restriction (either) for the depth of the coaches box from the sideline going back toward the stands.

And then for the second quote, why would the coach not be able to stand behind the bench during a timeout? Is this because he's out of the defined timeout area? Would there be any advantage possible gained, or just a letter of the law enforcement on that?

Is the coaching box still referred to as a privilege? If so, revoke that privilege during throw-ins where them standing interferes with the play.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

Purpose And Intent ???
 

Because of 1-13-3.

Yes, he's out of the defined timeout area.

Rule language (letter of the law).

There is no penalty stated for standing behind the bench during a timeout.

If there was, would it be the same penalty for being outside the timeout area, and what would that penalty be?

Why would anybody care where s/he is during a timeout? Seems the only concern of officials as to where anybody stands during such a time would be to make sure nobody else is snuck into the game, and that there's no funny business between opposing team members.