T-Fest '04

[Stat-Man]

(NCAA-W) Had a game suspended a month ago just 2 minutes in. Last night, we made it up and I'm still scratching my head over this situation.

Both Team A and Team B have added players since the game was suspended. Team A adds 3 players to the scorebook and Team B adds 1 player. I'm thinking to myself:

"Ok, each team added players, so each team will get a Tech for adding names to the scorebook after the game started, resulting in a double tech, no free throws, and the ball at the point of interruption where the game was suspended."

I was a bit shocked when the R for the game (we had a different crew than the one from the original date) gave Team A 3 Techs -- 1 per each name added and Team B 1 Tech their 1 new name added. Team B then shot 6 free throws with Team A shooting 2 afterwards.

I happened to realize I had a rule book with me, but after I got home and the game was well over. If I'm understanding rule 3 correctly, It should have been One Tech per team.

What was the correct was to handle this?

[BktBallRef]

No, it wasn't.

The initial change in the book requires a T.

After the intial change, they can make as many changes as they like with no penalty.

[ChuckElias]

The R was wrong to assess 3 Ts to Team A. As Tony said, the initial change gets a T, and then the rest are "freebies". Additionally, even if the R had been correct in giving the 3 Ts to Team A, s/he administered the T's incorrectly. You only shoot the T's that don't cancel out. So in your case, since Team B also received a T, they would only had shot 4 FTs; Team A should not have shot any FTs.

Hopefully, at the very least, the R did not add all 4 Ts to the team totals for each team. These are indirect T's and do not count toward the bonus.

Not a good way to start your day.

[Stat-Man]

Chuck:

I actually did ask the R that since he was assesing 3 Ts to 1, wouldn't one on each side cancel out? He was very firm that they didn't because they were administrative. He did confer with his partners and luckily ruled that all these Ts didn't go towards the bonus.

I'm just glad he didn't toss the Team A coach for having 3 indirects

As a person involved with Team A, it wasn't fun to start the resumed game down 8-3 (Team A was down 4-2 at the suspension point before all these technical free throws), but luckily the extra free throws had no bearing on the final score.

Hopefully tomorrow's games will have less excitement

[Lotto]

Originally posted by Stat-Man
I actually did ask the R that since he was assesing 3 Ts to 1, wouldn't one on each side cancel out? He was very firm that they didn't because they were administrative. He did confer with his partners and luckily ruled that all these Ts didn't go towards the bonus.

He definitely should have given only 1 T to each side. From the NCAA rulebook:

3-3. Art. 3. Once the game begins, a team can be charged with a maximum of one indirect technical foul for the infractions listed in Articles 1 and 2 of this Section.

This certainly covers the situation you described.

Now, is this a double technnical?

4-26. Art. 11. Double technical foul. A double technical foul occurs when opponents commit technical fouls against each other at approximately the same time.

Hard to say whether this applies to indirect Ts, since no "opponent" has committed these Ts. I couldn't find an A.R. that referred to this kind of case, so I'll pass on expressing an opinion.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Lotto
Now, is this a double technnical?

4-26. Art. 11. Double technical foul. A double technical foul occurs when opponents commit technical fouls against each other at approximately the same time.

Hard to say whether this applies to indirect Ts, since no "opponent" has committed these Ts. I couldn't find an A.R. that referred to this kind of case, so I'll pass on expressing an opinion.

Keep reading down to "simultaneous technical foul" (art. 15) and you'll have a definition that fits the crime.

Although, if the game was "suspended", I'd have to ask if it's really a T to add players before the "restart" of the game. It seems to me that the purpose of the rule is to prevent "surprises" and, as long as both coaches know, there's no "surprise" in adding a player during the suspension.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by bob jenkins
[/B]

Although, if the game was "suspended", I'd have to ask if it's really a T to add players before the "restart" of the game. It seems to me that the purpose of the rule is to prevent "surprises" and, as long as both coaches know, there's no "surprise" in adding a player during the suspension.

[/B][/QUOTE]Sounds like something that the schools and the league administration should have sorted out before the game, so that the officials could have been notified as to how to handle it.

[Damian]

Game had been suspended for a month. Things change. I believe that the rule as worded doesn't appy to this situation and comes under the Referee having authority to interpret and make judgements not covered.

If the book was corrected within the normal time limitations of the restart, I would have informed both coaches and started the game.

The multi-techs was just plain wrong.

[rockyroad]

So why was the game suspended??? Was this a weather issue, a fight, what???

[justacoach]

When filling out the scorebook for our games, I habitually list every possible team member, even those absent, in case the game is suspended.
I know I do it for a rules-based reason but I cannot recall the specifics.
Someone care to refresh the recollection of another old f???. Sorry, Viagra, Cialis etc have no memory enhancing component.

Thanks

[Larks]

Originally posted by Stat-Man
Chuck:

He did confer with his partners and luckily ruled that all these Ts didn't go towards the bonus.

3 t's....indirects ejection? dont count the T's towards bonus....

Say it with me class.....

DOH!!!

[Edited by Larks on Feb 12th, 2004 at 09:17 AM]

[Stat-Man]

Rockyroad:

We had barely got 2 minutes into the first game (doublheader scheduled) when the fire alarms went off. Apparently, a water pipe burst in the first floor lobby ( the gym in in the second floor*) and it supposedly triggered the alarm.

After spending 10 or so minutes outside, we got the ok to go back in. As we were just about to start play again, we got word that we had to suspend the game.

This game was originally scheduled in the first week of second semester classes. At the time, we had 3 players who were still awaiting grades from last semester, which is why we couldn't list them on the original game date. I agree that our league rules should probably state that when a game is suspended, anyone who has since become eligible can be added to the roster without penalty, especially since rosters change a lot for this reason on the Junior College level. But what do I know?

The kicker for me is that I unknowingly had my rulebook with me. Just not in the format and place I was looking for it. If I had known that, maybe the whole thing could have been prevented.

At least we got through the game even with the crazy restart. Even if we did lose by 3 or less, there's bigger issues in life to deal with.

* This campus used to be an old all-girls high school with a regulation gym on the second floor. It's basically 4 walls with stands on one side 8 feet off the surface. Perhaps not the world's most ideal gym, but we manage.

[rockyroad]

Thanks Stat-Man...my guess would be that your League does have rules somewhere, but it's one of those things which just doesn't come up very often...anyway, the guy was wrong to make it into a T-Fest...