Penalty Administration Question

[Nevadaref]

This came up in another thread, but I wanted to give it one of its own in order to get clearer feedback from everyone.

On the following play what calls do you make, how many FTs are awarded (shot), and how is the game resumed?

A1 and B1 create a held ball in the FT lane. These two players become entangled and are a bit upset with each other. After the whistle sounds and the players rise to their feet, A1 shoves B1 in the chest in an unsporting manner. B1 is pushed back about five feet and does nothing in response. As the officials close in and step between the two players, B6 leaves the team bench area, runs onto the floor, and punches A1 in the face. Since the officials are already right there, they are able to control the situation without anything else happening.

[blindzebra]

T on A1.

B6 charged with fighting and is ejected.

Indirect on B coach.

B shoots 2.

A shoots 2 and gets the ball at half court, no arrow change.

Now, we could charge A1 with fighting as well, since the push could fall under an unsporting act that leads to another player retaliating.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

T on A1.

B6 charged with fighting and is ejected.

Indirect on B coach.

B shoots 2.

A shoots 2 and gets the ball at half court, no arrow change.

Now, we could charge A1 with fighting as well, since the push could fall under an unsporting act that leads to another player retaliating.

Agree, but calling it a fight is a stretch imo. The melee woulda been over without B6's over-reaction.


Nevada will be along sometime though to report that some state handed down a ruling that, yes indeedy, it was a fight and A1 and B6 should both be charged with fighting flagrant fouls and ejected. Iow, it's a double flagrant technical foul. I don't agree with that ruling personally.

[Mregor]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Agree, but calling it a fight is a stretch imo. The melee woulda been over without B6's over-reaction.

Maybe. OTOH, A1 instigated it by pushing in the first place. As I recall, if a player's action causes retalliation, it is fighting.

Mregor

[deecee]

yes i can see that if B1 was the opposing fighter -- however for a player to come off the bench when B1 was gonna let it go and take the 2 ft's + possesion.

That is not fighting on A1 or anything close to that -- I could say instigation if the player that was directly effected hit back -- but if its just couple shoves each then double t's and anything that looks fishy from them again down the road dont wait just give em their walking papers.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by deecee

yes i can see that if B1 was the opposing fighter -- however for a player to come off the bench when B1 was gonna let it go and take the 2 ft's + possesion.

I could say instigation if the player that was directly effected hit back.

Basically, that's the way I looked at it too. The officials were already between A1 and B1. That one was over, so B6 coming in makes it two separate incidents instead of one imo.