I know if a coach gets ejected from a game they have to serve 1 game suspension, but what about a player?
I had a rec. game last night and a player who was ejected from last weeks game played last night and the other team ask me why is that player allowed to play if this league play by high school rules when he was ejected from the last game.
I told him I don't know any rule that after an ejection that player is suspended from there next game unless its a league rule.
The league director said that they play by high school rules, so if the book say it is a rule than he is suspended, so I try to find this ruling in the book but cannot find it, so can anyone help me with this?

It's strictly up to each league. There is nothing in the rule book concerning suspensions- for either coaches or players.

Tell coaches that inquire about a player or coach's eligibilty to participate in the game that they need to take it up with the leauge, tournament, or whoever runs the show. Refs aren't responsible for ensuring that players or coaches comply with suspensions, age requirements, etc.

And that is one of the few reasons you will normally see a result overturned in my experience - participation of ineligible personnel.

Depends on the league you are working for. Different/Stricter rules will apply according to the league policy.

In my Intramural league for example, a player gets 3 t's before they are done for good. Usually after the second, they are on their BEST behavior. However, two t's by one team in a game and the game is a forfeit. So you cold be up by 12 points and have a player lose control, get two t's and forfeit the game. End result, you lose 50-0.

In some rec leagues, the referees sometimes have to make a decision on eligibility also, in conjunction with a site supervisor. One city rec league I work, the teams must have the roster finalized by the 3rd week (I think), and cannot add any more players. The site supervisors maintain the rosters, book, etc. If a captain enters an ineligible player in the scorebook, it comes to the referees' attention and we declare a forfeit. Ditto for uniforms. If during pre-game, we determine the uniforms not to comply with league rules, we declare a player ineligible to play that night. Therefore, it is possible that the refs might have to make some kind of a determination during city rec league, depending on the local rules, etc.

An additional comment I failed to make. The same city rec league I just mentioned, if we eject a player the previous week, he/she must sit out for one week. Suppose "suspended" player shows up, and we see him/her in warmups, game is forfeited immediately.

I'm curious as to how you "know" this. Please explain.

It's common knowledge 'round these parts! :)

The one game suspension is mandated by UHSAA policy. The same applies to players. It is not an NFHS rule, nor is it in the book.

The policy is the same in Nevada. It is an NIAA (our state athletic governing body) rule, which pertains to all sports. All the coaches and players know that they have to sit if they get tossed.

Not to start a whole ball of wax over the ejection/suspension thing, but I'm curious as to how they define the 1-game suspension. Here in Nebraska, an ejection leads to an automatic 1-game suspension at the same level in which the ejection happened. Suppose a freshman on the varsity team gets ejected from the varsity game, he can't play in ANY games till after the next varsity game. Same for a coach. Is it the same out there or are there variations on this suspension philosophy?

Here in Wyoming it is the same. I think it is a good system..

don't like it
 

That is actually the only rule I think is really stupid. just my opinion of course. It comes down to vagaries of scheduling. If he intent is to suspend a player from a game at the same level of play, do that. If the intent is to suspend a player from the same level or a higher level, do that.

The situation I am thinking of is a player suspended from a Freshman game not being able to play again if they don't have any more freshman games. So a player could get bounced from a freshman game, have no remaining freshman games to play, and not be able to play at the varsity level for 10 games, while a player bounced from a varsity game could sit one varsity game and be back. Same offense, different result. Makes no sense whatsoever to me.

I know they shouldn't get ejected and all that, but ejections do happen and should be treated in a manner that is equal for all. Having a one-game suspension that affects more than one game for some and not for others is wrong to me.

There is a stipulation in Nebraska that if there are no games remaining at that level then the next level up can be used, for example, if there are no remaining freshman games, then you can use reserves (if that is the next level your school offers) games if there are any remaining. If not, then you can go up more. I think that rule is in place, but I'm not 100 percent sure. I'm only an official, and all we have to do is eject, fill out report, submit to the NSAA, and go on about our business.

I believe this system is fair and equitable, because it prevents some players from having to sit out just one night, while others have to sit out for several nights, depending on the scheduling arrangements. I know it doesn't sound fair, but it's turned out to be equitable here in Nebraska, considering the limit on the number of varsity contests/dates that are allowed.

Re: don't like it
 

I don't think there should be ANY automatic suspensions.

There are some situations that simply call for a player being tossed from the rest of the current game.

Now, it may be hard to think of those situations in basketball, but these draconican penalties are usually handed out across the board in all sports in the state.

I am a baseball umpire and I ejected a catcher from a varsity game for jumping up and arguing a call after I warned him not to do it earlier in the game. Wham -- automatic suspension. Some umpires won't eject and some umpires won't report ejections to the state because they feel like imposing their own judgment on the validity of the suspension.

Why not treat each on a case by case basis (by the league or by the state)?

Most will get the one game -- some will get none and some will get more than one.

--Rich

I do agree that some guys won't toss someone because of that situation also. I saw a game this year two of the top guys in the state working it. In the first half there was a T on a player for running his mouth...nothing serious just a little over the top. At half time the officials talked about the fact that if he got another one he would get tossed and suspended etc...Early in the 3rd quarter there in a tipped ball that goes out of bounds with this player and another one "fighting" for the ball. The other kid ends up on the ground and the original player had a couple words for him...One of the officials came from across the court and whacked him...in the middle of whacking him he realized what the situation was...so they talked and didn't stick with the T. They got the offended team coach to buy it and went on...We gave them a hard time.. I understand meaning to signal a block and using the PC mechanic and vice versa...but how do you mean to signal white ball and end up in the T signal LOL....

Re: don't like it
 

Coach, I understand your point and agree with it for the most part. The one thing I could see happening is that a Freshman who plays on the varsity and the JV team gets tossed from a varsity game. The next nite there is a freshman game so the coach puts him on the team lets him get his suspension time served and has him available for the next JV game....it could go both ways...I think I prefer the system we have now..at this age I think it is better to make the penalty a little more harsh and try to get it under control. This being said, in the 7 years I have worked basketball and football, I have only seen 2 kids tossed by our associations...thankfully we just don't have that big of problem here.

Ejection/suspension/same level
 

My take is different, You need to make the "sit one game" rule apply to the "same level" for the following reason:

If a varsity player gets tossed, his coach could then decalare him Junior Varsity, have him sit the next JV game, and have him eligible for the next Varsity game. If the JV game was between the "game where ejection took place" and the next varsity game, he could, presumably avoid sitting out a varsity game through a loophole.

And don't think the coaches wouldn't try it!

FWIW... I am just a "Junior Member"

Sorry
 

I said the same thing as cmathews, sorry. Like I daid, I am a JR. Member.

Rich, I would have to disagree on the case-by-case scenario. That would create more work for the state association, and would almost require the officials, players, coaches, and administrators to have to make themselves available for hearings, etc. It would be much easier to do everything across the board. Matter of fact, you would be hard-pressed to find anyone in Nebraska who doesn't like this rule.

Nope, the only input required is from the official who made the call. Right now that's the only input that the state gets in the must-suspend states anyway. You don't have to provide due process in order to have some flexibility.

When I lived in another state, I ejected a baseball coach from the district tournament he happened to be hosting. I received a call from the state office looking for feedback whereupon I read my ejection report word-for-word.

He got the 2 games that the state uses as a default penalty. However, there is still leeway for those situations where the suspension isn't warranted. Sometimes, the best ejection is the one that solves the problem for THAT GAME. I realize that this is more of an umpire's mentality than basketball official's, BTW, but that's because they are different sports with different protocols for arguing calls. And because I don't have a whistle and a technical foul I can use in a baseball game.

In Oregon, a coach/player must sit out until one game is played at the level they were ejected from. Anytime a coach is ejected, they school/athletic department is fined. Each occurance (across all sports) increases the amount.

With all ejections, a form is filled out that has the officials statement. It is sent to the state and the school. There is a blank on the form for appealing the suspension part of the ejection. I know of a few cases where the officals statement even suggested that a suspension was unnecessary.

For example, A1 mouths off a little in the 1st half and is a saint for the rest of the game. With 1 minute left, A just scored to be down by 2, and B making a throwin, A1 bats the ball that is being passed along the endline to another thrower. T. Disqualified.

This should not be a suspension and I'm the state should and, I believe, will consdier the nature of the T: was it unsportsmanlike or a lessor T?

OK, here comes my $.02......just throwing out some thoughts...comments appreciated.

What if you changed the words "suspended for the next game" to "suspended through the next game date" at the same level at which they were competing when ejected. I think that would simplify the situation and comply with the intent of the rule, at the same time making it almost impossible for coaches to play the smoke & mirrors game.

For example:
1. Player "A" plays JV only. At the JV game on Tues. night he/she is ejected. Result: he/she does not suit up on Friday.

2. Player "B" plays JV & swings to varsity. At the JV game on Tues. night he/she is ejected. Result: he/she does not play in the Varsity game that follows, and does not suit up for any games on Friday.

I think maybe there also needs to be a clear distinction between disqualification (5 personal or two technical fouls) and ejection (flagrant or unsportsmanlike conduct) with the suspension penalty applying only to the latter.....

First, I more agree with Rich that there should be no auto suspensions. Let the situation determine whether or not a person should be suspended. But, I am also a realist. And this would require a person or a committee to make a determination on every ejection, and an immediate report faxed after every ejection to support that decision. And the decision must be quick because the suspension might need to take effect the next night. So it is much easier from an adminstrative perspective (especially at the state level) to have it be automatic, even though it may lead to some inequities. Kind of like a red card in soccer - once it's out, you sit, regardless of whether or not your red card was not nearly as bad as somebody else's yellow card.

That said, I think there needs to be a clause in there that says greater or equal counts, or that it is served in the next game played at the same level without impact to other levels. The greater than or equal criteria can only be used if the player has played at a higher level during the current season. IOW, you can't dress a freshman for a varsity game for the first time all year and say it meets the criteria for serving the suspension. But if you have played in varsity games, you can sit out one varsity game to meet the requirement of the one game suspension for a feshman game. It seems to be fairer that way.

What gets me about this is that player C plays varsity, does the same thing as player B, and only sits one game. Player B sits 3 games for one ejection. How is this fair?

Mind you I don't support players getting ejected, but this just seems like two players doing the same thing and being punished differently for it.

What gets me about this is that player C plays varsity, does the same thing as player B, and only sits one game. Player B sits 3 games for one ejection. How is this fair?

Mind you I don't support players getting ejected, but this just seems like two players doing the same thing and being punished differently for it. [/B][/QUOTE]

Since most associations limit player participation to 5 quarters total in any given game day, player B wouldn't really miss 3 full games.

To turn it around on you, suppose player B gets tossed in Q3 of the JV game, having played in 3 quarters. Is it fair for him to miss only his 2 quarters of eligibility in the subsequent varsity game and be eligible again the next game date.

Let's compromise - how about we make it subsequent games on the same game date as ejected through the next game at the same or higher level at which they regularly participate. That way player B would miss the subsequent varsity game the same evening and the JV game the next game date, but still be eligible to play 1 quarter in the following varsity game.

That's why I said I think there needs to be a clear distinction between disqualification and ejection - the latter being only for flagrant acts or repeated USC.

I actually have the ejection stats for spring sports handy for my state. They include this in the packet at the state rules meeting.

Last season a TOTAL of 59 baseball player ejections happened statewide (47 in the spring season and 12 in the summer season). 17 ejections in girls soccer, 1 in softball, and 3 in boys track and field (there was 1 in tennis in 1999, which I'm still trying to figure out).

20 total coaches all last season -- 13 in baseball, 3 in softball, 3 in girls soccer, and 1 in track-and-field. At all levels.

79 ejections from March through June. I think each one could be looked at for a couple of minutes without rocking the boat too much. I also think that there would be more ejections if the auto-suspension was not there -- which isn't necessarily a bad thing. I'm willing to bet that many should have-been ejections didn't happen because officials didn't think the punishment fit the crime. Instead, the officials probably took grief that they shouldn't have to take.

It could be worse though -- in a state I used to live in, the penalty for head coach ejection used to include forfeit, I believe.

--Rich

Wow, no ejections in Basketball or Football!?!

I also talked to our asst director of the state org. I asked if a kid got 2 Ts for slapping the ball on a throw-in, if he would have to sit one additional game. The answer was yes. It is too difficult to get into the nuances, he said. You get tossed, you sit, period. And no, disqualification for 5 fouls does not mean a suspension.

Don't have those stats handy. The ones I gave were only for spring sports.

Too difficult to get into the nuances? Auto suspensions are as bad as the California three strikes law -- sure you're going to get serious offenders, but you're also going to get the person shoplifting from Walmart.

--Rich

1. As for ejection stats, it was unclear to me what your parameters were. Thanks for clearing that up.

2. On the autosuspension: I understood his point and can see why they do it that way, I just disagree with it.

WOW! An ejection in tennis???? I would love to hear that story! Maybe it was some offspring of John McEnroe's.