If a1 and b1 both hit each other, is that considered off-setting T's and no shots are taken? What if 1 player from a1 bench runs on the court? And what if there are 2 players from team a and 1 player from team b? How many shots are taken.

semper Fi

Without my rulebook in hand...
 

I will attempt to clearly, concisely sort this out. I am sure the other Veterans will correct my errors.

A1 and B1 are gone for fighting.

"Bench participants", A2 and A3, are also tossed for fighting and each recieve a technical (each is assessed as a bench T). So, Team B gets 4 FTs and the ball at the division line.

How did I do?

Willie, he didn't say that they participated in the fight. He said they they left the bench. Also, B6 enter the floor as well.

Flagrant double technicals on A1 and B1. No shots.

If A2 comes off the bench, then he is ejected, the coach gets an indirect T, B shoots 2 FTs, and gets the ball for a throw-in at the division line.

If A6, A7, and B6 come off the bench, they each get a flagrant T, then they are ejected, and both coaches get an indirect T. B shoots 2 FTs, and gets the ball for a throw-in at the division line, as there was one more T called on A than B.

FIBA -

A1 and B1 - ejected, no shots, no loss of possession (if no possession restart with jump ball).

Any players leaving bench - ejected (even if not participating in the fight)

Any coaching staff - ejected if they are not actively attempting to prevent the fight/seperate THEIR players

If both teams have players/coaches ejected, then their are no free throws.

If one team has players/coaches ejected the other team gets 2 free throws, plus possession, reegardless of the number of players ejected.

If a bench players were to throw punches it would be an indirect for leaving the bench, and then a direct for participating.

A coach can find himself out the door pretty quick for not controlling the bench (Like, if he already had 1 indirect for dunking).

But, no matter how many people come off, it is just one indirect.

Players don't get "indirects" (in HS ball). THe player gets a direct either way, and the coach gets an indirect either way. The difference is that the coach gets one indirect total for all the players that do not participate and one indirect for each player that does participate.

Sorry, I was referring to what you assess the coach, jsut didn't make it clear.

But, I still think it is a <u>direct</U> is they particpate.

Maybe ... I'm not clear on what you are saying.

There are three "classes" of individuals to consider: Players (on the floor), bench personnel, and coaches.

Players are easy -- it's a direct T and a DQ. The penalties offset (IOW, if one A and one B fight, no shots; if three A and one B fight, B shoots 4).

Coaches are easy -- it's a direct T and a DQ whether they participate or not (assuming you didn't beckon them). Again, the penalties offset.

Bench personnel is a little more difficult -- it depends on whether they participate. If the bench personnel do not particiapte, they are still DQ'd and a foul is added to tthe team total for both. But, the coach will only get one indirect, and a maximum of one penalty will be assessed. IOW, if one A and one B leave the bench, each coach gets an indirect and no throws are shot. If three A and one B leave the bench, each coach gets one indirect, Team A is charged with three fouls, team B is charged with one foul, and team B shoot two throws.

If the bench personnel participate, then the coach gets one indirect for each person and the fouls offset. THrows are shot for each penalty that is not offset. If three A and one B leave and participate, Coach A gets three indirects (and is ejected), Coach B gets one indirect (and can stay, assuming nothing else happened), Team A is charged with three fouls, team B is charged with on team foul, and B shoots four throws.

If you have multiple categories, add them up individually, then offset. Shoot throws only if the penalties do not offset.

The point I was trying to make is: The "indirect" and "direct" T's assesed to the coach vary depending on what has happened. A lot of new guys, and some vets forget there is a distinction.

If players comes off the bench they get 1 t and are ejected, but the coach gets a single indirect no matter the number of players leaving the bench. If they then get invovled it is a direct, not an indirect, to the coach for each instance of participation.


So, if 4 guys come off, it is one indirect, to the coach; if two participate in the fight, two directs are assesed to the coach, he is now gone along with his players.

I was never trying to dispute the fact the players get a single t and run, just there can be broader implications to the coach for not controlling his/her bench.



[Edited by Brian Watson on Jan 16th, 2002 at 12:56 PM]

Brian,

The only way that a coach can receive a <B>direct</B> technical is if HE actually comes off the bench and/or participates in a fight. The coach cannot receive a direct technical for something someone else did!

The difference is, as someone stated above, that if several players come off the bench, but do not participate, the coach is only assessed a single indirect technical.

However, if several players come off the bench and DO participate, the coach is assessed an indirect technical foul for each player that participated.

You cannot give a direct technical to a coach for bench behavior under any circumstances.

That's wrong, Brian. A coach does not get an direct T if a sub comes off the bench and fights. A coach can only get a direct technical foul for an offense that he commits. h can never get a direct T for something a sub or other bench personnel does.

The double fouls by A1 and B1 are definitely flagrant but they are not necessarily a technical. If A1 and B1 trade punches while the ball is live, the fouls are personal. If the ball is dead, then the fouls are technical. I am not going to try to attempt to sort out the fouls on A6, A7, and B6 because I am too lazy to get my rule book out and the fighting rule and all its variations makes my head hurt.

Subs have to be technicals, as they are non-players.

10-3-10 says that figthing is a technical foul. It doesn't say anything about the ball having to be dead in order for it to be a technical, and not personal. I realize that 10.4.4a describes flagrant personals but when there's a conflict with the RB and the CB, I'll go with the RB.

If two players swing at each other during a live ball but don't connect, are you going to call personal fouls? You can't have a personal foul without contact. The act of fighting is a T.

Therefore, anytime I have a fight, technical fouls will be assessed, not personals.

[Edited by BktBallRef on Jan 16th, 2002 at 09:53 PM]

My thinking is that 10-3-10 (Player T if charged with fighting) supercedes 4-18 (fighting is simply a "flagrant act") and 4-19-5.

4-19-1 does say live ball contact is a personal foul, but restricts this to contact "which hinders an opponent from performing normal defensive and offensive movements."

Of course, the one advantage of the IM league I work, is that any and all technical, flagrant, or intentional fouls result in two points to the offended team and the ball at the half-court line. If something's flagrant, I can simply eject the kid, and not worry about who's shooting what and inbounding where. :)