You make the call, part whatever

[Mark Padgett]

Should there be any ejections? Or is it just your average run-of-the-mill chickfight?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4jij...elated&search=

[Lcubed48]

[QUOTE=Mark Padgett]Should there be any ejections? Or is it just your average run-of-the-mill chickfight?

Looks like a old fashioned chick fight to although not a very good one. KICK ME! KICK ME!! PLEASE!!! NO! NO! HIT ME! I INSIST!
But to answer your question, an ejection or two would seem to be warranted depending on how much of the entire play that the crew saw. Fortunately for me, no girls/womens game that I've worked has degenerated into that.

[Jurassic Referee]

Under NFHS rules, I'd say 2 ejections for fighting--#5 Red and #10 Gold. And it looked like #9 Gold deliberately dropped the ball on #5 Red when she was down.

Sooooooo......
- someone fouled #5 Red in the act of shooting.
- followed by double flagrant technical fouls on both #5 red and #10 gold for fighting.
-followed by a technical foul on #9 gold.

- the substitute for #5 red gets 2 FT's with no one on the lanes.
- no FT's for the double flagrant technical fouls.
- any Red player(s) can shoot the 2 FT's for the "T" by #9 Gold.
- throw-in for Red at center.

Looks like a FIBA game, so I don't have a clue what the call should be under that ruleset.

We've looked at this one before iirc.

[Mountaineer]

I agree with Jurassic Ref - 2 ejections, T on #9 but I don't think she dropped the ball on purpose. I thought #4 red reached around #9 and accidentaly knocked the ball out of her hand.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Under NFHS rules, I'd say 2 ejections for fighting--#5 Red and #10 Gold.

Agree.

And it looked like #9 Gold deliberately dropped the ball on #5 Red when she was down.

Disagree. Looks to me like the ball was knocked out of her hands. If I'm not sure about it, I'm not going to add the T.

Eject for the kick and the push and leave it at that.

[Camron Rust]

I agree with JR....but could even see tossing #9 as an option. She had no business straddling the red player. It looked like she was doing so to intimidate her...would have been interesting to hear too.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Disagree. Looks to me like the ball was knocked out of her hands. If I'm not sure about it, I'm not going to add the T.

Eject for the kick and the push and leave it at that.

So.....NFHS.....
- sub for #5 Red shoots 2 for the foul in the act of shooting
- no FT's for the double technical foul
-resume play at POI of the double technical foul, which is the Red sub for #5 shooting 2 FT's with the teams lined up on the lanes.

[Ref in PA]

What bothered me most was the location of the hands of the ref when pulling gold 10 away from the fight.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Ref in PA

What bothered me most was the location of the hands of the ref when pulling gold 10 away from the fight.

I noticed that but I figured he was just trying to keep abreast of the situation.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

We've looked at this one before iirc.

Yeah I remember seeing that left cross before. I am *still* impressed!

[rainmaker]

That #10 needs some serious anger management classes.

But then, #5 had no business kicking her. Sheez, what an idiot.

Was there a sheriff there? If they knew there would be problems.... hmmm.... not sure how to finish that sentence.

[Mountaineer]

I've always been taught that you don't grab a player and pull them away - if you restrain their arms like that and someone takes a swing at them that could be even worse!

I still say that #9 gets a T for standing over the player on the floor. That means gold will shoot two additional FT's - in addition to the 2 for the foul in the act of shooting.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Yeah I remember seeing that left cross before. I am *still* impressed!

Hell hath no fury like a wimmen kicked.

I think that's in the Bible somewhere.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Mountaineer

I still say that #9 gets a T for standing over the player on the floor.

I wouldn't have a problem with that. What I was disagreeing with was that the player intentionally threw or dropped the ball on the player on the floor.

If you think the straddle is unsportsmanlike, then by all means whack away.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I wouldn't have a problem with that. What I was disagreeing with was that the player intentionally threw or dropped the ball on the player on the floor.

If you think the straddle is unsportsmanlike, then by all means whack away.

Both are straight judgment calls.