Bad situation . . . Could've been worse!

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

1) How do you figure it's covered by R10-4-4? There's no mention of a "fight" anywhere in R10-4-4. It doesn't matter where in the rulebook that you find the word "fight" anyway. A " fight" is still defined in R4-18 as always being between two opponents. If players do come on the floor because a "fight may break out", then that "fight" has to be between opponents, not fans.

2) I'm referencing team members leaving the "bench area" in R10-4-4. There's no mention of a "fight" in that article. You're referencing R10-4-5, a completely different article. R10-4-4 and 10-4-5 have different penalties. There's no mention of just one technical foul penalty being administered anywhere in R10-4-4PENALTY.

Changed Situation.

During a timeout, an altercation breaks out in the stands across from the team benches. Players/subsititutes from both teams leave the bench area and head at any rate of speed towards the altercation.

Do we now have a situation where a fight (as defined by rule) might break out?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Changed Situation.

During a timeout, an altercation breaks out in the stands across from the team benches. Players/subsititutes from both teams leave the bench area and head at any rate of speed towards the altercation.

Do we now have a situation where a fight (as defined by rule) might break out?

Nope. There's no "opponents" fighting, is there? If they're just going to take a look, you'd need a crystal ball to determine that a fight might break out between the teams. I know that I ain't that smart.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Nope. There's no "opponents" fighting, is there? If they're just going to take a look, you'd need a crystal ball to determine that a fight might break out between the teams. I know that I ain't that smart.

So you don't think it is possible that opponents might fight when they are running towards an altercation in process? That stretches the bounds of credability. Remember that opponents don't actually have to be fighting just the possibility of opponents fighting is sufficient.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

So you don't think it is possible that opponents might fight when they are running towards an altercation in process? That stretches the bounds of credability. Remember that opponents don't actually have to be fighting just the possibility of opponents fighting is sufficient.

I'm kind of in favor of calling what you actually know, not what you think. It's possible that the roof might cave in too. That doesn't mean that I'm gonna clear the gym just in case.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Ask Allen Iverson.

Best. Post. Ever. (Regarding bowling.) I know kids should get a second chance for a lot of things. But it always seemed to me that he got a break just because he could play basketball. I know that's how the real world works. But at 15 or 16 years old, that's a sad lesson to teach a kid.

[bigdogrunnin]

OK, uh, WOW. Didn't expect so much response, but hey, THANKS! Anyway, to clarify for some, the players were ACROSS the free throw lane AWAY from the bench. This situation occurred during a FULL timeout by Team B, and they were ALL at their bench to begin the TO. NONE of the players ever made it to the stands, as they were stopped by several coaches and myself.

As I have read through posts, I have realized there can be many different perspectives when considering a rule that either may not exist, or the rules that do exist may not be applicable to the situation. For some, I truly do appreciate the "rules aspect," of your posts because it forces me to take into consideration the "legality" of officials' rulings. For those posting from the "intent of the rule" position, that helps me in the "game management" and "coach relations" domain. So, to both sides (and in-between), Thank you.

For myself, I have been calling several years now, and study the rules at length as time during the day permits, and I could have NEVER imagined almost an entire team leaving the bench area to go INTO the stands to participate in a fight. JR, yes, I do believe the intent for at least ONE players was to participate (his mother started the fight with a teenage boy cheering for the other team). The rest were just lending, um, uh . . . "morale support."

Anyway, at the time, with emotions running high on the part of Team B (players and coaches), and because the game had been going really well (even with one Flagrant T given earlier), I chose to try to focus everyone's attention back on the game and the task at hand. I could say that I just have "that kind of court presence," or I can say I just got lucky. I mainly did what I did, because I didn't want to see a group of kids lose what could have been an entire season to one REALLY dumb decision, as they could very easily have been suspended for the duration by the State Association. I had my co-official's support, as well as the coaches, and game administrators . . . with the understanding that any additional incidents and we WOULD clear the gym. As I stated earlier, the rest of the night went great, and we had no other problems.

Thanks again for the responses.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bigdogrunnin

Anyway, at the time, with emotions running high on the part of Team B (players and coaches), and because the game had been going really well (even with one Flagrant T given earlier), I chose to try to focus everyone's attention back on the game and the task at hand. I could say that I just have "that kind of court presence," or I can say I just got lucky. I mainly did what I did, because I didn't want to see a group of kids lose what could have been an entire season to one REALLY dumb decision, as they could very easily have been suspended for the duration by the State Association. I had my co-official's support, as well as the coaches, and game administrators . . . with the understanding that any additional incidents and we WOULD clear the gym. As I stated earlier, the rest of the night went great, and we had no other problems.

Thanks again for the responses.

There's a heckuva difference between a discussion here and facing that type of situation in real life.

Sounds like you did a good job in a tough situation.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Best. Post. Ever. (Regarding bowling.) I know kids should get a second chance for a lot of things. But it always seemed to me that he got a break just because he could play basketball. I know that's how the real world works. But at 15 or 16 years old, that's a sad lesson to teach a kid.

He went to jail for his offenses and I'm pretty sure he missed his senior basketball season, so I don't consider that getting a break, especially for a 17 year old kid.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

He went to jail for his offenses and I'm pretty sure he missed his senior basketball season, so I don't consider that getting a break, especially for a 17 year old kid.

I believe he was pardoned by the govenor at the time, and his conviction was overturned on appeal.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

You're referencing R10-4-5, a completely different article.

Correct, JR, I got the number wrong. I've edited my post. Now how about addressing the merits of it instead of the mistake in the rule number citation.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Correct, JR, I got the number wrong. I've edited my post. Now how about addressing the merits of it instead of the mistake in the rule number citation.

OK. It's without merit.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

OK. It's without merit.

Good comeback, Potsy.