What dunks?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

1)What rule do we use to forbid these guys sitting on the bench?

2)Also, 10-1-2-b states that they can be added to the team member list, at the price of a technical foul for each.

1)Rules 4-34-2 and 1-13-1. The coach told you that they're not team members. That also means that they're not bench personnel. The bench is for team members and coaches. That means that their butts aren't going on the bench.

2) Again, the coach has already told you that they're NOT team members. That's why you aren't going to let them be added to a team member list. Just say "no". If the coach wants to argue, just say "fine, Coach, we'll both put a report in after the game and we'll let someone up the line decide whether I'm wrong or not."

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

1. The rule is the one that allows JR to inform the coach that if they sit on the bench for the game in uniform then they are going to be considered team members and penalized appropriately, but if they spend the game in the lockerroom or go change into street clothes and then have a seat they won't be considered team members. That's 2-3, baby.

Okay, I'll accept that. But that same rule, (2-3, baby) would also give me the authority to consider them team members when they were out there in uniform warming up with the other team members and illegally dunking the ball.

2. The correct penalty for adding BOTH team members to the scorebook after the ten minute mark is a SINGLE team technical foul.

You're right. My bad.

[just another ref]

So then, what if, during the game, a guy seated on team A's bench holding a clipboard stands up and says "What a horrible call! Ref, you suck!" Official signals a technical foul on team A bench. He reports and designates the offender. Technical foul on assistant coach A, indirect on the head coach.
Head coach A speaks up quickly. "Whoa, that guy is not a coach. He is not a part of or in any way affiliated with our team.

Then what?

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by just another ref

So then, what if, during the game, a guy seated on team A's bench holding a clipboard stands up and says "What a horrible call! Ref, you suck!" Official signals a technical foul on team A bench. He reports and designates the offender. Technical foul on assistant coach A, indirect on the head coach.
Head coach A speaks up quickly. "Whoa, that guy is not a coach. He is not a part of or in any way affiliated with our team.

Then what?

If I were the ref, I'd assess the coach. If I know her, and I think she's sincere, I'm having the idiot with the clipboard thrown out of the gym. Otherwise, I'm telling the coach, "You need to control your bench and that means everyone who's sitting there."

[just another ref]

Fifteen minutes prior to the game two team members of team A dunk with both the coach and official as witnesses. When coach submits his squad list, he deliberately omits the names of the violators. Official assesses a technical foul for each act of dunking as team fouls and charges the coach with two indirect technical fouls. This ruling is correct.

I think something may have gotten lost here. I think the point of this question was not the definition of a team member, but whether the coach was allowed to escape a penalty by a technicality. Let's add some information to the original situation. Assume that everybody knows that these guys are team members. This is their second game of the day. You saw both of them play in the first game. When the dunks occur, the coach yells, "What's wrong with you two?? Get off this court and get out of my sight!" He then grabs his own scorebook and is seen using an eraser. He may even tell the official, "Those guys know better than that. Just for that, I'm leaving them off my list of players for this game."

Would this change anyone's ruling?

Originally Posted by just another ref

So then, what if, during the game, a guy seated on team A's bench holding a clipboard stands up and says "What a horrible call! Ref, you suck!" Official signals a technical foul on team A bench. He reports and designates the offender. Technical foul on assistant coach A, indirect on the head coach.
Head coach A speaks up quickly. "Whoa, that guy is not a coach. He is not a part of or in any way affiliated with our team.

Then what?

I'd assess the T on the coach at that point. He is responsible for who is on the bench. If they're not affiliated with the team, they shouldn't be there. But that's up to him to enforce.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Fifteen minutes prior to the game two team members of team A dunk with both the coach and official as witnesses. When coach submits his squad list, he deliberately omits the names of the violators. Official assesses a technical foul for each act of dunking as team fouls and charges the coach with two indirect technical fouls. This ruling is correct.

I think something may have gotten lost here. I think the point of this question was not the definition of a team member, but whether the coach was allowed to escape a penalty by a technicality. Let's add some information to the original situation. Assume that everybody knows that these guys are team members. This is their second game of the day. You saw both of them play in the first game. When the dunks occur, the coach yells, "What's wrong with you two?? Get off this court and get out of my sight!" He then grabs his own scorebook and is seen using an eraser. He may even tell the official, "Those guys know better than that. Just for that, I'm leaving them off my list of players for this game."

Would this change anyone's ruling?

Nobody has gotten lost and nothing has changed. It's the exact same scenario. If the coach says that they aren't team members, you either believe the coach or you don't believe him. And if you don't believe him, you damnwell better be able to come up with a good reason for saying he's a liar.

Never do anything that you can't justify afterwards in a game report. And you sureashell can't justify saying "Well, I thought the coach was lying to me." Put the onus where it belongs---> on the coach, not the official.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

So then, what if, during the game, a guy seated on team A's bench holding a clipboard stands up and says "What a horrible call! Ref, you suck!" Official signals a technical foul on team A bench. He reports and designates the offender. Technical foul on assistant coach A, indirect on the head coach.
Head coach A speaks up quickly. "Whoa, that guy is not a coach. He is not a part of or in any way affiliated with our team.

Then what?

This actually happened to me in a aau/travel league setting a while ago.

Right off the tip guy sitting on the end of the bench was chirping. After a few minutes I had enough and T'ed him. Head coach and assistant both jump up asking who's the T on. I point to the victim, they say "he's not a coach, he's the BUS DRIVER!!"

I laugh, the bus driver laughs, the coaches scream at him to get off the bench up into the stands and keep his damn mouth shut. They finally smile and say it won't happen again. The other coach asked what happened, I told him I T'ed the bus driver by mistake. He laughed and we played on.

No biggie.

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

I laugh, the bus driver laughs, the coaches scream at him to get off the bench up into the stands and keep his damn mouth shut. They finally smile and say it won't happen again. The other coach asked what happened, I told him I T'ed the bus driver by mistake. He laughed and we played on.

No biggie.

So did you shoot the 2 or just play on?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Never do anything that you can't justify afterwards in a game report. And you sureashell can't justify saying "Well, I thought the coach was lying to me." Put the onus where it belongs---> on the coach, not the official.

It's not about lying. It's about using a loophole to avoid a penalty. What if the coach asks you if it's okay? "Mr. Ref, I apologize. I warned those two knuckleheads about that. What if I leave them off the list for this game? Do we still get the T's?"

I say yes, based on the intent and purpose of the rule.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Fifteen minutes prior to the game two team members of team A dunk with both the coach and official as witnesses. When coach submits his squad list, he deliberately omits the names of the violators. Official assesses a technical foul for each act of dunking as team fouls and charges the coach with two indirect technical fouls. This ruling is correct.

I think something may have gotten lost here. I think the point of this question was not the definition of a team member, but whether the coach was allowed to escape a penalty by a technicality.

No, that's exactly the point I addressed (maybe you should take me off your ignore list, you're missing a lot of good stuff ) A technicality does not change the intent.

Let's add some information to the original situation. Assume that everybody knows that these guys are team members. This is their second game of the day. You saw both of them play in the first game. When the dunks occur, the coach yells, "What's wrong with you two?? Get off this court and get out of my sight!" He then grabs his own scorebook and is seen using an eraser. He may even tell the official, "Those guys know better than that. Just for that, I'm leaving them off my list of players for this game."

Would this change anyone's ruling?

No T's from me in this case. It's clear, unless the coach is a GREAT actor and really quick on his feet that those kids didn't belong on the court to begin with. I would call this in to the assigner later just in case.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by PYRef

So did you shoot the 2 or just play on?

Waved off the T.

Played on.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

It's not about lying. It's about using a loophole to avoid a penalty. What if the coach asks you if it's okay? "Mr. Ref, I apologize. I warned those two knuckleheads about that. What if I leave them off the list for this game? Do we still get the T's?"

I say yes, based on the intent and purpose of the rule.

Nothing has changed....

You ask the coach if the kids are team members of his or not.

If he says "Yes", you hand out the "T"s.

If he says "No", you put their butts in the stands and they're off the bench until the game is over.

Jmo but it's that simple.

[RushmoreRef]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Nothing has changed....

You ask the coach if the kids are team members of his or not.

If he says "Yes", you hand out the "T"s.

If he says "No", you put their butts in the stands and they're off the bench until the game is over.

Jmo but it's that simple.

If it walks like a duck and if it talks like a duck.....I think you know where I'm going with this.

IT'S A DUCK!!!

If they are in uniform and warming up with the team it's 2 indirects and I'll take my chances with the state association on this one...

[Y2Koach]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Nothing has changed....

You ask the coach if the kids are team members of his or not.

If he says "Yes", you hand out the "T"s.

If he says "No", you put their butts in the stands and they're off the bench until the game is over.

Jmo but it's that simple.

If they are not "part of the team", ask what the heck they are doing on the floor, and have the site administrator remove them from the gym. Non-team members should not be on the floor for insurance liability reasons, and if they came to the game in their own uniforms, pretending to be on the team, ran out on the floor to participate without the approval of the coach (and of course the coach would not approve of non-team members participating as it would be a liability issue), then they should have no problem removing them from the gym. Detention might also be in order. As a coach, I would not let my players put our team in jeopardy by costing us points and possession, and I definitely would not let non-players jeopardize the financial functionality of the school district. that should about cover it