Fight on the Bench

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I think the whole fight is treated as a "simultaneous" situation and offset each other (to the extent they are equal).

NFHS rule 10-6PENALTIES(Rule 10 Summary)8b(2) seems to say exactly that:
Bench personnel leaving the team bench during a fight or when a fight may break out:
(2)"Participate in the fight-all participants are assessed flagrant personal fouls and disqualified. The head coach is assessed one indirect technical foul for each bench player participating in the fight. If the number of each's team's participants is corresponding, no free throws are awarded and the ball is put into play at the point of interruption. If the number of each team's participants is unequal, two free throws are awarded the offended team for each additional player, followed by a division line throw-in opposite the table".

There's no mention anywhere in there of the fighting participation fouls having to be against each other or occur simultaneously, as Nevada is recommending.

Note: Another question is how many indirect "T"s is each head coach assessed.

[bigdog5142]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Note: Another question is how many indirect "T"s is each head coach assessed.

Team A coach gets two indirect "T"s for A6 & A7 being bench players that actively participated in the fight. B Coach gets none as no bench players left the bench and no bench players actively participated in the fight.

I guess this would depend on whether or not A6 actively participated...getting punched isn't voluntary participation...unless you consider the original taunt as part of the fight...then it stands as I stated above. Had the bench players only entered the court and not participated, the coach for team A would get only one indirect "T" for bench players leaving the bench area. Active participation dictates an indirect "T" for each bench player involved. (At least that's what I remember reading...don't have the rulebook with me to confirm.)

[kbilla]

[QUOTE=bigdog5142]Team A coach gets two indirect "T"s for A6 & A7 being bench players that actively participated in the fight. B Coach gets none as no bench players left the bench and no bench players actively participated in the fight.

I guess this would depend on whether or not A6 actively participated...getting punched isn't voluntary participation...unless you consider the original taunt as part of the fight...

the original taunt is absolutely part of the fight as i interpret 4.18.2...an unsporting act that causes an opponent to retailiate by fighting is considered to be "participating in the fight"....the taunt is unsporting and the guy retaliated, so no brainer IMO...

[bigdog5142]

Yeah...you're probably right...I was thinking the same thing, but without being there...

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by bigdog5142

Yeah...you're probably right...I was thinking the same thing, but without being there...

Yeah without being there it is tought to envision the totality of a crazy situation like that, but I would say A6 started it...just goes to show you, you have to be careful who you taunt, you never know who is nuts and ready to kill you for it!

[Nevadaref]

JR and Bob,
Did you notice that the two people that I am talking about are one player, B2, and one team member from the bench, A7.

Thus they fall into different categories for the fighting penalties. I know of nothing that allows us to cancel/offset penalties across categories for a fight, unless the fouls constitute a double foul or a simultaneous foul. That is why I am saying that they probably need to be penalized in the order in which they occurred.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

JR and Bob,
Did you notice that the two people that I am talking about are one player, B2, and one team member from the bench, A7.

Thus they fall into different categories for the fighting penalties. I know of nothing that allows us to cancel/offset penalties across categories for a fight, unless the fouls constitute a double foul or a simultaneous foul. That is why I am saying that they probably need to be penalized in the order in which they occurred.

OK, I see your point now. It does have some merit, but I don't think that I agree with you re: the purpose and intent of the rule. I also can't think of any rules language that will definitively prove either take as being right or wrong.

One for the rulesmakers that read this forum......

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

JR and Bob,
Did you notice that the two people that I am talking about are one player, B2, and one team member from the bench, A7.

Yes, I noticed.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bigdog5142

I guess this would depend on whether or not A6 actively participated...getting punched isn't voluntary participation...unless you consider the original taunt as part of the fight...then it stands as I stated above.

A6 started the fight with the taunt. Whether he threw a punch or not isn't relevant. According to the rules(rule 4-18-2 and case book play 4.18.2), starting a fight by taunting IS regarded as fighting.