Back when I kept the book, I used one slash through the number to signify a foul. If it was a technical, I'd put a T through the number. It seemed to work.

If I were to add my opinion to the design of a scoresheet, I'd also add an area for technicals administered to bench personel. It's probably wishful thinking, but I think it would be able to work. Most scorers don't understand the difference between a direct and indirect T on a coach. [/QUOTE]

The book that my younger brother's team uses has 5 personal fouls to mark off as well as 2 techs. It also has 3 techs for the HC and 3 techs for a "non team member" I guess we would use that for bench personnel. I don't know how anyone but the HC in NFHS could get more than 2 T's.

I am in the habit when I am keeping the book to mark off one of the personals as well as one of the T's. I know that a T is not a personal (although I have had Varsity TASO officials tell some of our bookkeepers that on more then one occasion) however, I don't think it hurts anything and will keep me from making a mistake. If I am one of the officials and they want to mark of a personal and it will help them keep track of the fouls I am not going to argue with them about it. Just my 2 cents.

Worse, a grade 3-4 AAU type game.

A player could easily get three techs in NFHS. Two to get disqualified, and at least one more from the bench if he gets real stupid.

Re:
 

Damian, I believe the only time a coach is assessed a direct T for the actions of a player is when a DQ'd player participates in the game. This used to be flagrant on the kid and indirect to the coach, but it changed (last year, I think).

As far as a T on a player who just picked up his 5th personal, it's an indirect on the coach, but only if he's already been informed that the player has been DQ'd. This is a dumb interp, in my opinion, but that's the way it is.