Punch - Unsportsmanlike conduct? Technical?

[Hawks Coach]

Curious
I didn't read this part of your post clearly enough. All I can say is that I would be shocked if any official watched a punch, saw contact, and passed on the call. I can always quibble about what should and should not be called, but I have NEVER seen a ref observe a punch and pass. Just because you think that's what you saw on video doesn't mean that's what happened.

There was a Norway vs. Brazil world cup game where Norway got a penalty kick that tied the game late in the match. Every replay angle showed that nothing had happened - the defender had not committed the foul and the announcers ripped the ref. The next day in the paper, a photographer with a different angle provided a beautiful shot of a complete take down shirt grab that all replay angles missed. You probably have one angle on this play, and it isn't sufficient to say that either ref was looking right at the punch and saw in live action what you see on tape.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by CuriousFan
I'm sure this have been covered before, but I couldn't find it in the topic list...

OHAA (Ohio HS Athlitic ***.) game. About one minute left in the geme, B down by 3. A1 gets the pass, B1 defends closely and as A1 tries to pass, B1 fouls attempting to make the steal. Immediately after B1 passes the ball, B1 turns and punches A1 in the stomach (grazed).

Is it a technical? When/Why wouldn't it be?

Thank you in advance for your comments

I do not have my rule books in front of me but I am going to give the posting a go at it.

Since this game was probably played last night, it was either a boys' or girls' jr. H.S. game, because the freshmen, jr. varsity, and varsity regular seasons have not started yet, or it could have been during a scrimmage game.

Under both NFHS and NCAA rules, the definition of fighting does not state specifically state that a fighting foul is a technical foul and the definition of a flagrant foul includes some of the attributes of a fighting foul that are found in the definition of a fighting foul, but in the technical foul section of Rule 10, it states that a fighting foul is technical foul.

The foul described in the originally posting could be either a fighting foul and therefore a techincal foul or it could be a flagrant personal foul (because there was contact while the ball was live).

How would I have called it under NFHS rules? Since there was contact, I would have charged B1 with a flagrant personal foul. B1 is ejected, A1 shoots two free throws, and Team A gets the ball for a throw-in nearest the spot of B1 foul.

The fighting foul is cumbersome to apply, and if one just takes the time to apply the rules as they are written, the net effect is the same.

[Hawks Coach]

Mark
I take it from your post that Ohio has no special provisions for handling a fight after the fact, i.e., automatic suspension for a certain number of games? I think that state provisions for fighting are often more strict than for other types of ejections, and that's why many have advocated that a fight must called as such if that's what you see. May not matter in Ohio, but in other states it could make a big difference.

[Adam]

Originally posted by CuriousFan

Both referee's responded as if to break up a fight by running at the two players. On the video, the punch was clear and based on where the two referee's were standing (one under the basked with a clear view, one behind and to near mid-court with a clear view, A1 and B1 at the top of the key) and how they moved it is clear they saw the punch. There was no reason to move based on the foul before the punch.

No, it is not clear they saw the punch from what you wrote. The ref under the hoop would not have been watching this play, if he's keeping an eye on his primary area like he's supposed to. The ref on the ball could easily have missed it based on where the players were. They could have been reacting to the action *after* the punch, rather than reacting to the punch.
That a punch is clear when watching the video (looking for it) does not mean it was clear in live action.

[huskyz]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I do not have my rule books in front of me but I am going to give the posting a go at it.

Since this game was probably played last night, it was either a boys' or girls' jr. H.S. game, because the freshmen, jr. varsity, and varsity regular seasons have not started yet, or it could have been during a scrimmage game.

Under both NFHS and NCAA rules, the definition of fighting does not state specifically state that a fighting foul is a technical foul and the definition of a flagrant foul includes some of the attributes of a fighting foul that are found in the definition of a fighting foul, but in the technical foul section of Rule 10, it states that a fighting foul is technical foul.

The foul described in the originally posting could be either a fighting foul and therefore a techincal foul or it could be a flagrant personal foul (because there was contact while the ball was live).

How would I have called it under NFHS rules? Since there was contact, I would have charged B1 with a flagrant personal foul. B1 is ejected, A1 shoots two free throws, and Team A gets the ball for a throw-in nearest the spot of B1 foul.

The fighting foul is cumbersome to apply, and if one just takes the time to apply the rules as they are written, the net effect is the same.

Why do you say that there was contact while the ball was live? In the situation B1 fouls A1 while A1 is attempting a pass, it is after the foul on the pass that the punch occurs. The ball becomes dead when a foul occurs (unless it is during a try/tap/free throw is in flight.

[huskyz]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Why do you say that there was contact while the ball was live? In the situation B1 fouls A1 while A1 is attempting a pass, it is after the foul on the pass that the punch occurs. The ball becomes dead when a foul occurs (unless it is during a try/tap/free throw is in flight. [/B]

Agree completely. If you do call the swing as a punch, then you have a false double foul composed of a personal foul on B1 followed by a flagrant technical foul on A1. [/B][/QUOTE]


False Multiple Foul...that's what you meant, right? Both fouls are on B1.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by huskyz
[/B]

False Multiple Foul...that's what you meant, right? Both fouls are on B1. [/B][/QUOTE]You know what? I just spent all freaking day reading this play wrong, and giving dumb answers. I read it as B1 fouling A1, and A1 retaliating by taking a swing at B1.

No excuses. I'm stoopid!

Anyhoo......2 scenarios:

1)Officials call a common personal foul on B1. They decide that the swing wasn't a punch,so they ignore it. One and one for A1, with the players on the lanes.
2)Call the common personal foul on B1, followed by a flagrant technical foul on B1 for the punch. A1 gets the one/one with players not lined up; then any A player(s) shoot the 2 FT's for the T with nobody on the lanes; A then gets the ball at the division line for a throw-in.

Sounds like the officials went with Door #1.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I do not have my rule books in front of me but I am going to give the posting a go at it.

Since this game was probably played last night, it was either a boys' or girls' jr. H.S. game, because the freshmen, jr. varsity, and varsity regular seasons have not started yet, or it could have been during a scrimmage game.

Under both NFHS and NCAA rules, the definition of fighting does not state specifically state that a fighting foul is a technical foul and the definition of a flagrant foul includes some of the attributes of a fighting foul that are found in the definition of a fighting foul, but in the technical foul section of Rule 10, it states that a fighting foul is technical foul.

The foul described in the originally posting could be either a fighting foul and therefore a techincal foul or it could be a flagrant personal foul (because there was contact while the ball was live).

How would I have called it under NFHS rules? Since there was contact, I would have charged B1 with a flagrant personal foul. B1 is ejected, A1 shoots two free throws, and Team A gets the ball for a throw-in nearest the spot of B1 foul.

The fighting foul is cumbersome to apply, and if one just takes the time to apply the rules as they are written, the net effect is the same.

I made a mistake in reading the original posting. I missed the first foul by B1. This makes the situation a false multiple foul. The first foul by B1 is a live ball contact foul and therefore is a personal foul and it is a common foul. The second foul by B1 is a dead ball contact foul and therefor is a technical foul which at the very least is a flagrant foul and possibly a fighting foul.

I would still stand by my original decision to treat B1's second foul as a flagrant foul (technical one because it occured while the ball was dead). This means that anybody (NHFS: two different players, one for each free throw; NCAA: the same player must shoot both free throws) from Team A can shoot the two free throws of the technical. Under NFHS rules the fouls are penalized in the order that they occured meaning the Team A will get the ball for a throw-in at the division line opposite the Scorer's Table; under NCAA rules the technical foul free throws are shot before the penalty for the common foul are imposed and the ball is put into play is if the common foul was the only foul that occured.

The OhioHSAA does not have in extra penalties for fighting per se. The first time a player is ejected from a basketball game during the season, the player is suspended for the rest of the day and from all basketball games that the school plays until the school has played two games at the level of the game from which the player was ejected. This rule also applies to coaches. An example would be if the varsity coach, who is an assitant coach during a freshmen game, is ejected from the freshmen game. If the school plays four varsity games before the freshmen team plays two games, the varsity coach cannot return to coaching until after the second freshmen game is played. (This would type of penalty would apply to a player because in Ohio a player is allowed to play 80 quarters during the regular season; freshmen can spread their 80 quarters over freshmen, jr. varsity, and varsity games, and sophomores, junior, and seniors can spread their 80 quarters over jr. varsity and varsity games.) The second time a player or coach is ejected from a game during the season, the player or coach is suspended for the rest of the season including post-season play, and the coach must go to Columbus with his principal to have a personal meeting with Clair Muscaro, the OhioHSAA Commissioner. And I would think that is not a 2-1/2 to 3 hour drive that a coach would want to have to take with his principal.

[BktBallRef]

The original poster indicated that the punch was by B1, Then, later in the thread, he changed it to A1.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
The original poster indicated that the punch was by B1, Then, later in the thread, he changed it to A1.

Yup,and I answered both of the scenarios at different times.

Thank goodness, maybe my mind isn't going after all.

[BktBallRef]

Well, your mind isn't going and your ticker is good. All you need now is two young legs!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
Well, your mind isn't going and your ticker is good. All you need now is two young legs!

I know, I've tried. They keep saying "NO" though!

[Gimlet25id]

Originally posted by CuriousFan
Sorry, I'm new and not used to the A/B's and should have read it better.

A1 gets the pass, B1 defends closely and as A1 tries to pass, B1 fouls attempting to make the steal. Immediately after **A1 passes the ball, A1 turns and punches B1** in the stomach (grazed).

If I understand right, the same result -- person who punched is called for a technical, other team gets two foul shots and the ball.

B1 fouled out on the play (5th). A1 was awarded a one and one. A won the game by two points.

Both referee's responded as if to break up a fight by running at the two players. On the video, the punch was clear and based on where the two referee's were standing (one under the basked with a clear view, one behind and to near mid-court with a clear view, A1 and B1 at the top of the key) and how they moved it is clear they saw the punch. There was no reason to move based on the foul before the punch.

A1 did not land a good punch because he had to strech to land it, but B1 confirmed that it landed and as evidenced on the video.

B1 is fouled out. A1 is ejected for fighting (Flagrant foul), A team coach has to have a sub shoot the one and one first. Then B team designates a shooter for the 2 shots for the flagrant foul. Ball is put back in play to the B team @ a spot throw in nearest to where the foul occured.