Bad situation . . . Could've been worse!

[bigdogrunnin]

Interestingly enough, the game itself went fairly well, other than the one flagrant technical.

As for the players on the court, does the rule book specifically address WHERE the fight is occurring? Because the fight was in the stands, and was not "part of the game," and the players didn't actually participate, do we still consider that a flagrant T on those players on the floor? Just curious.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by bigdogrunnin

As for the players on the court, does the rule book specifically address WHERE the fight is occurring? Because the fight was in the stands, and was not "part of the game," and the players didn't actually participate, do we still consider that a flagrant T on those players on the floor? Just curious.

To answer your question, the rulebook does not specifically address where the fight is occurring. To answer the second part, it's a judgement call. I could argue both ways, however, I like the way you handle it even better. I don't think enough time is spent discussing game management skills. When to apply game management skills over the rule of law?

To further clarify your point, which I think is about bench personnel leaving the bench area. Forget about the act of fighting for a moment. Bench personnel or players on the court can not go into the stands whether there's a fight or not. That's an automatic flagrant, you're ejected. Case in point, I had a bad game several years ago, championship summer varsity game where a simliar type of thing happened. The star player in the game gets into it with a fan and takes his shirt off and runs up into the stands and confronts the fan. No punches where thrown, calmer heads prevail. Even though no punches where thrown, the player ejected for running into the stands.

What would you have done, if the fight started in the stands behind the bench?

The question I have is how can you continue the game with just 1 player? The one player can not pass the ball to himself so he could never inbound the ball. It makes no sense to me.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Old School

The question I have is how can you continue the game with just 1 player? The one player can not pass the ball to himself so he could never inbound the ball. It makes no sense to me.

He could throw the ball inbounds such that it touches an opponent and attempt to get it. He could also just throw it down the court to the opponents and play defense, if his lead is large enough.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Old School

To further clarify your point, which I think is about bench personnel leaving the bench area. Forget about the act of fighting for a moment. Bench personnel or players on the court can not go into the stands whether there's a fight or not. That's an automatic flagrant, you're ejected.

Based on what rule, genius?

Originally Posted by Old School

Case in point, I had a bad game several years ago, championship summer varsity game where a simliar type of thing happened. The star player in the game gets into it with a fan and takes his shirt off and runs up into the stands and confronts the fan. No punches where thrown, calmer heads prevail. Even though no punches where thrown, the player ejected for running into the stands.

You ejected him for running into the stands? By what rule. I’ve got a T here, maybe a flagrant for taunting or something. But just going into the stands is a T by itself.

Originally Posted by Old School

The question I have is how can you continue the game with just 1 player? The one player can not pass the ball to himself so he could never inbound the ball. It makes no sense to me.

Because, by rule, you can continue a game with 1 player on a given team if you deem he has a chance of winning the game. I’m sure in your absolutely dominant intelligence you can come up with a scenario in which this might be possible.