The crew did nothing...

[PIAA REF]

I think you are using a case that doesn't fit the situation. This is my opinion I do not have my books with me at work, but I will leave you with this. If you did this im my area during the playoffs while being evaluated you would be told you were wrong. 100%, yes the T is legit but not the toss. The reason I said playoffs is that is where we are evaluated (sometimes)
I am not trying to get into a pissing match with you at all, I just do not agree with an ejection.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by PIAA REF

I think you are using a case that doesn't fit the situation. This is my opinion I do not have my books with me at work, but I will leave you with this. If you did this im my area during the playoffs while being evaluated you would be told you were wrong. 100%, yes the T is legit but not the toss. The reason I said playoffs is that is where we are evaluated (sometimes)
I am not trying to get into a pissing match with you at all, I just do not agree with an ejection.

Sometimes evaluators are morons, too.

He was (1) personal and (2) profane.

It's funny, in baseball just saying "you're horrible" would be an near-automatic ejection. Toss in an f-bomb adjective and some wouldn't eject in a basketball game?

Wow. Just wow.

I don't need a rule book or case book to point towards the locker room and say, "Go there."

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

If it doesn't bother you if a high school player says that to you, why would it bother you if another official said that to you also?

Think about it. Or not.

Because WE are suppose to be on the same team. Sometimes your posts either deserve or dont deserve a response. I guess you do that to make a point or trigger a response. See JR's post and respond to his the same way.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

Because WE are suppose to be on the same team. Sometimes your posts either deserve or dont deserve a response. I guess you do that to make a point or trigger a response. See JR's post and respond to his the same way.

If Rut wants to let high school players swear at him also, then good for him too. I have the same opinion whether it's you or him. You do NOT let high school players swear AT you EVER imo. Ther'e a big difference between swearing and swearing at an official.

If y'all want to put up with that though, hey, bend over and be my guest.

Again, jmo. If you doesn't bother you when players call you names, you sureasheck shouldn't get upset at what's said to you here either.

[DC_Ref12]

The definition of flagrant, according to Merriam Webster is: "so obviously inconsistent with what is right or proper as to appear to be a flouting of law or morality."

In my humble opinion, a player using the most obscene of language, in a screaming fashion, towards an official, represents not just a lack of respect, but in fact a desire to belittle and/or abuse. It is one thing to call a technical on a player who is using profanity out of frustration and to no one in general or very loosely directed at an official's call. It is a whole other thing to have a player "scream" the most foul obscenity at a figure of authority.

It's a flagrant on my court.

[truerookie]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

You don't? Then you must have been the same idiot that didn't throw the flagrant T.

Tough skin has zero to do with it. You allow him to get away with it and he'll do it again. That's why we have problems today with kids like OJ Mayo, because officials don't have the balls to do what's right.

5.6.2 SITUATION F:
Following the final horn in a game which has Team A leading 62-60, the coach of Team A sprints after the game officials and shouts profanity at the referee who has just left the playing court outside the end line.

RULING: The referee shall charge the coach with a flagrant technical foul and the results of the two free throws will determine whether an extra period will be necessary. The jurisdiction of the officials had not ended as the referee was still within the visual confines of the playing area. (2-2-4)

I agree! I had the exact case book play happen to me. Team B won 82-80 B. I WHACK HIM!! Unfortunately, the opposing team missed the free-throws.

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

If Rut wants to let high school players swear at him also, then good for him too. I have the same opinion whether it's you or him. You do NOT let high school players swear AT you EVER imo. Ther'e a big difference between swearing and swearing at an official.

If y'all want to put up with that though, hey, bend over and be my guest.

Again, jmo. If you doesn't bother you when players call you names, you sureasheck shouldn't get upset at what's said to you here either.

But, officials dont swear at officials, so that statement and your responce is irrelevant. Please check you grammer at the end of your post. Evidently, you are upset or cant type plain english. JMO....LOL

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by PIAA REF

I think you are using a case that doesn't fit the situation. This is my opinion I do not have my books with me at work, but I will leave you with this. If you did this im my area during the playoffs while being evaluated you would be told you were wrong. 100%, yes the T is legit but not the toss. The reason I said playoffs is that is where we are evaluated (sometimes)

That's kinda sad I think.

IMO a HS player that screams "you are f'ing horrible!" at the officials opens himself up to immediate DQ. Why work for an assignor who doesn't agree?

[PIAA REF]

You keep on saying we are letting kids swear at us, were not we all agreed to T them up, that is their penalty Now if they do it again then yes they would be gone. So we are not letting them do that, we just have a different philosophy on the penalty. For someone who has come across to me (on here) as a nice but opinionated guy, you my friend have been out of line on this post. You are out right trying to belittle your fellow officials. You are wrong. You in Old School are one in the same to me now.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

If Rut wants to let high school players swear at him also, then good for him too. I have the same opinion whether it's you or him. You do NOT let high school players swear AT you EVER imo. Ther'e a big difference between swearing and swearing at an official.

If y'all want to put up with that though, hey, bend over and be my guest.

Again, jmo. If you doesn't bother you when players call you names, you sureasheck shouldn't get upset at what's said to you here either.

Here is the problem I have with your argument, you are caught up into swearing. There are other comments that I find worse than swearing. Swearing are just some specific words. I look for a little more than just some words.

Peace

[NewNCref]

Originally Posted by PIAA REF

I think you are using a case that doesn't fit the situation.

But if we're calling consistently throughout the game, then it really doesn't matter that it took place during the game as opposed to after the game. I agree, it is a little different, but I believe that one of the keys here is that profanity, directed specificly at an officials, is flagrant.

Here's why I thought this one should be flagrant.

1.) You're horrible- Criticizing you personally.
2.) Throw in the f-bomb- Now he's criticizing you personally, with profanity.
3.) The volume- This was loud, loud enough that I could clearly hear it in the stands.

I always thought this was a no-brainer flagrant, but now I'm starting to rethink it a bit.

[DC_Ref12]

Originally Posted by PIAA REF

You keep on saying we are letting kids swear at us, were not we all agreed to T them up, that is their penalty Now if they do it again then yes they would be gone. So we are not letting them do that, we just have a different philosophy on the penalty. For someone who has come across to me (on here) as a nice but opinionated guy, you my friend have been out of line on this post. You are out right trying to belittle your fellow officials. You are wrong. You in Old School are one in the same to me now.

I understand that you would T him up, but IMO, that's an incredibly lenient punishment for such a (dare I use the adjective?) flagrant act of unsportsmanlike conduct.

I think we disagree not just as to the penalty, but to the interpretation of the word "flagrant." How would you define flagrant?

[IREFU2]

UNSPORTING BEHAVIOR
2.8.1 COMMENT: Unsporting tactics, in general, involve relationships between opponents, between the players and officials, between the spectators and officials, between the players and spectators, between the coaches and spectators, and between coaches and officials. In most situations, it does not apply to the relationship of a player to teammates, nor to the coach and members of the team. However, these standards are not without exception. For example, profanity on the part of a participant, coach or member of the team is considered to be an unsporting act, whether or not the profanity is directed at any individual or is merely a means of “letting off steam.” (10-1-8; 10-3-7; 10-4-1)

[DC_Ref12]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

UNSPORTING BEHAVIOR
2.8.1 COMMENT: Unsporting tactics, in general, involve relationships between opponents, between the players and officials, between the spectators and officials, between the players and spectators, between the coaches and spectators, and between coaches and officials. In most situations, it does not apply to the relationship of a player to teammates, nor to the coach and members of the team. However, these standards are not without exception. For example, profanity on the part of a participant, coach or member of the team is considered to be an unsporting act, whether or not the profanity is directed at any individual or is merely a means of “letting off steam.” (10-1-8; 10-3-7; 10-4-1)

This rule doesn't really back up the assertion that the original scenario is NOT flagrant. The bolded section is intended to clarify that just because profanity is not directed towards anyone in particular, it does not mean it shouldn't be called. This has nothing to do with the flagrant nature of a technical foul.

I will ask you the same question I asked the other poster. What would you consider to be the definition of flagrant? How far would this particular player have to go to get you to call a flagrant?

[PIAA REF]

The bottom line is that this is the officials judgement. To me this falls into the unsportmanlike rule and I would issue a T. In my state a Flagrant T would mean he is done for the night and the next game as well. I just don't see him being frustrated and verbalizing it should result in that stiff of penalty.
I will use this example. (names are made up)
Bob is really mad at his insurance agent because he thought he was entitled to more money. Bob yells at him and even goes as far as saying he is going to hurt him. Only 2 things could happen: Agent does nothing or at worst reports Bob to police and a minor infraction is assessed to Bob
OR: Same case Bob is mad and punches agent or even kills him. In what case should a stiffer penalty be issued?
Same case in BBALL frustration was shown with words (t is given) Other actions (hits someone) Goes after an official: Stiffer penalty is given.
This is just my opionion. What we need to understand that this is a judgement issue.