If you deem it to be unsportsmanlike, then whack him. Unsportsmanlike activity is always deserving of a T. But if the kid is just being a dope and leaning over, being a goofy teenager ("hey, look what I'm doing! har-har-har"), then get him back to his bench area.

I'm not saying that you can't T in this sitch. I'm saying that there is no rule support for a T simply for being out of the bench area.

Yes, you did. And I should have phrased my question, "So you don't think a player standing in the other team's bench area during a timeout is unsporting?

There are plenty of unsporting situations that the case book and the rule book don't specifically address with, "Assess a technical foul," but it's still done. Just seems very obvious to me that an opponent moving into an area where the opposing team is holding a timeout conference is unsporting. JMO.

It's a test question. Please give <b>YOUR</b> answer, complete with rules citations to back it up.

Then we get to second-guess you.

I await your answer to this question. [/B][/QUOTE]

JR, maybe I didn't clarify my position well enough. I'm not second guessing how you would answer the test question. I'm curious as to how you would handle the situation I described in a real game sitch. For the sole purpose of answering the test question, the answer I would give is the official is correct. What I was asking is whether, in a real life game situation, after team B's players have returned to the floor following a granted timeout, with time remaining in the time out period, if B-1 stands on the playing court near the sideline next to Team A's bench, while Team A is still huddling, are you really going to make B-1 move, let alone "T" him? I know team A is entitled to the full allotment of time for the time out, but, in my opinion, B-1 is entitled to that spot on the floor. Just curious. By the way, I'm an IAABO member and I agree that the test questions that they come up with, and the HFHS come up with, are often times ridiculous. A member of my Board is on the NFHS rules committee and we have often brought this to his attention. His response is usually that, believe it or not, the questions are derived from real game situations brought to the attention of the NFHS by coaches and athletic directors.

JR, maybe I didn't clarify my position well enough. I'm not second guessing how you would answer the test question. I'm curious as to how you would handle the situation I described in a real game sitch. For the sole purpose of answering the test question, the answer I would give is the official is correct. What I was asking is whether, in a real life game situation, after team B's players have returned to the floor following a granted timeout, with time remaining in the time out period, if B-1 stands on the playing court near the sideline next to Team A's bench, while Team A is still huddling, are you really going to make B-1 move, let alone "T" him? I know team A is entitled to the full allotment of time for the time out, but, in my opinion, B-1 is entitled to that spot on the floor. Just curious. By the way, I'm an IAABO member and I agree that the test questions that they come up with, and the HFHS come up with, are often times ridiculous. A member of my Board is on the NFHS rules committee and we have often brought this to his attention. His response is usually that, believe it or not, the questions are derived from real game situations brought to the attention of the NFHS by coaches and athletic directors. [/B][/QUOTE]Walter, no you didn't clarify your original position well. You kinda intimated that I'd personally T the player up rather than possibly follow another tack. I responded as above because I never did say anything even close to that. I was just trying to figure out a reasonable answer to the original question. I think that I've already answered your question twice in other responses in this thread. Personally, I'd just shoo the kid back to his bench. I think that most officials would favor that option instead of bludgeoning the player with a T.

Btw, you can add Referee magazine to the list of reputable sources that have asked stoopid questions also. What bothers me <b>isn't</b> that IAABO or the FED are asking questions about situations that rarely occur. What bothers me is that IAABO is coming up with questions that are completely <b>unanswerable</b> imo. Iow, they're asking questions that do not have a definitive answer anywhere in the rules. Questions like that are a complete waste of time. The answer to these types of questions is just the <b>opinion</b> of the person that wrote the question. That's wrong- as well as being stoopid. Questions like that serve absolutely no purpose when it comes to testing an official's rules knowledge. I hope that clarifies my position too.

Now that's cynical!!

JR, well said.