Was reading my rule book tonight....

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

If you can verify this, then the proper penalty is a team technical foul. Nothing gets charged either directly or indirectly to the head coach.

The reference is 10-1-3 and the chart on page 72.

Which I don't think is right, I think it should be charged directly to coach. But...that's not the question.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Sorry, BITS, but the point that I'm making is that the NFHS has already made the determination for us on what is "blatant cheating" and what is not. For those acts that are the NFHS has provided a penalty of a flagrant foul. However, for those acts which the NFHS does not consider to rise to this level, just a normal technical foul is required.

You are putting your own personal feelings into this instead of just administering the rules as written as the NFHS instructs us to do.

Really? And just where did I suggest that the official should administer anything beyond what the rules suggest? Did I suggest a flagrant T? Did I suggest a forfeit? No, I quite clearly said that the official is not empowered to do anything more than assess the penalty specified.

However the NFHS is, as far as I can recall, silent on the matter of what must, can, and should be reported to the state office. And on that point, you and I disagree.

If a coach is using video at halftime, and knows it's against the rules, he's blatantly cheating to gain an advantage. Your assertion that it's not because the Fed didn't make it a flagrant T is merely your inference, nothing more.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Sorry, BITS, but the point that I'm making is that the NFHS has already made the determination for us on what is "blatant cheating" and what is not. For those acts that are the NFHS has provided a penalty of a flagrant foul. However, for those acts which the NFHS does not consider to rise to this level, just a normal technical foul is required.

You are putting your own personal feelings into this instead of just administering the rules as written as the NFHS instructs us to do.

We are putting our feelings into this discussion, but we aren't putting them into the game. My feeling is that use of replays during half time is a particularly egregious form of cheating. Yes, I think it's even more so than "purposefully and/or deceiptfully" delaying returning to the court.

I recognize, however, that the NFHS may or may not disagree with me. I also recognize that my particular state may or may not agree with me. As BITS suggested, I'd likely report it through my assigner or directly to the appropriate governing body. If they see fit to do something about it, fine. If not, no skin off my back; I gave them the info they needed.

It's not worth asking for direction on, either, due to the fact that it's highly unlikely to ever happen.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Why? Do you file a report to the state association for all team technical fouls? If the scorebook were incorrect and there had to be a T assessed would you think that should be reported to the state too?

It's just another rule that has been infringed and the proper penalty given. Nothing more needs to be made out of it.

No, of course I don't report all technical fouls. But rather than distinguish some T's as reportable and others as not, I distinguish instead how the rule was violated.

In this area, using video at halftime is extremely rare, and doing so would be a flagrant violation of the rule. Although the T is not a flagrant T, given the circumstances it merits the same kind of report a flagrant T would receive.

It's up to the state how to handle the report, and if they deem the violation non-flagrant they're free to ignore it.

[JoeTheRef]

Originally Posted by mbyron

No, of course I don't report all technical fouls. But rather than distinguish some T's as reportable and others as not, I distinguish instead how the rule was violated.

In this area, using video at halftime is extremely rare, and doing so would be a flagrant violation of the rule. Although the T is not a flagrant T, given the circumstances it merits the same kind of report a flagrant T would receive.

It's up to the state how to handle the report, and if they deem the violation non-flagrant they're free to ignore it.

I totally agree. In Georgia, if a coach gets an unsporting technical, it gets reported to the state association. This would be no different. Yes you apply the rules and penalty according to FED guidelines, but each state has it's own guidelines governing technical fouls given to a coach. For Nevada to compare this technical to any other violation of the rule is crazy, IMO.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by mbyron

No, of course I don't report all technical fouls. But rather than distinguish some T's as reportable and others as not, I distinguish instead how the rule was violated.

In this area, using video at halftime is extremely rare, and doing so would be a flagrant violation of the rule. Although the T is not a flagrant T, given the circumstances it merits the same kind of report a flagrant T would receive.

It's up to the state how to handle the report, and if they deem the violation non-flagrant they're free to ignore it.

Here's why I make this comparison. If a team were to remove the scorebook at halftime and take it to the lockerroom, most officials would say, "Oh, that's ok, they didn't know they couldn't." Now when a coach uses a video clip from the first half in the lockerroom, why wouldn't an officials say the same thing? What if the coach truly didn't know that he couldn't do that?

I don't see why people think that one is isn't a big deal and that the other is egregious.

For those who say that they are doing no more than enforce the proper penalty, I can't agree because not only are they enforcing the book penalty on the court, but they are also adding something else to it by generating a report to the state, unless the state specifically requires one for all Ts.

That's just my opinion and clearly not everyone agrees. Each person must do as they believe is best, but I'm not going to be writing a report on every unusual rule infraction that I handle in a game.

PS Would anyone write a report to the state office because there was a T for goaltending during a FT?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

PS Would anyone write a report to the state office because there was a T for goaltending during a FT?

Yup, but only because we get to write a report for every HS T.
This just strikes me as different.

FWIW, I'd likely to go through my assigner and defer to his/her judgment. If I didn't have one, I'd call the state office and ask them if they wanted a report. Again, it's not a question I'd even ask for clarification now, however.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Here's why I make this comparison. If a team were to remove the scorebook at halftime and take it to the lockerroom, most officials would say, "Oh, that's ok, they didn't know they couldn't."

I can't remember (and I don't have my books with me). What's the penalty for this in HS ball?

[JRutledge]

In my state you can write what is called a "Special Report" for any unsportsmanlike activity. Now these reports are used for ejections, but we have been encouraged to use these reports for situations that do not involve an ejection. The NF has nothing to do with this (Why do we have to keep saying this?). If a coach used an illegal tactic and was not ejected, I would consider writing such a report to inform the state of that conduct.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I can't remember (and I don't have my books with me). What's the penalty for this in HS ball?

There's not one specifically listed, bob, but I'm sure that you already knew that and were just making that point.

It would up to the referee to decide how to deal with it. You also are certainly aware of what the penalty for this is in NCAA ball.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

For those who say that they are doing no more than enforce the proper penalty, I can't agree because not only are they enforcing the book penalty on the court, but they are also adding something else to it by generating a report to the state, unless the state specifically requires one for all Ts.

It's worth noting that filing a report with the state association is not, strictly speaking, a penalty. (And, Nevada, don't you prefer to speak strictly?)

If the state chooses to sanction the school or team or coach, then that would be a penalty, presumably within their purview.

It's my position that, in view of the seriousness of the offense, the state should know about it. If after learning of the episode the state does not deem it serious, then next time I'll know what to do. Even in that case, though, the state might make it a point of emphasis next season, in which case the report has been useful.

BTW, in the post-Patriots photography era, I find it difficult to believe that a high school varsity coach would not know this rule.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by mbyron

It's worth noting that filing a report with the state association is not, strictly speaking, a penalty. (And, Nevada, don't you prefer to speak strictly?)

Did I state that it was a penalty? I believe that I said that it was something additional. In other words the official taking it upon himself to go beyond what is required. Why?

Originally Posted by mbyron

If the state chooses to sanction the school or team or coach, then that would be a penalty, presumably within their purview.

Sure, and why is that coach or team getting slapped with an additional penalty? Because an individual official decided to make an issue out of something. I would guess that the school is going to receive a copy of that report and that there may well be some acts of reprisal against the official. The school may feel that the particular official is out to get them or somehow wants them penalized more. I could see this leading to a deletion. Not that I would be deterred by that, if I felt that it was the right thing to do. As I already said each person needs to make his own decision about that.

Originally Posted by mbyron

It's my position that, in view of the seriousness of the offense, the state should know about it.

I don't see why you believe that video tape is serious offense. What's so unsporting about video tape anyway. What if they looked at the same tape in pregame? Is it now devious for them to view it again? I'm missing the nastiness of the issue here.
Is there some huge benefit that a team receives from a video? I would guess that it might be more beneficial than a chalk board, but not so drastic as to alter the outcome of the game.
BTW what if the home scoreboard showed a video replay on the big screen and the coach told his kids on the bench to watch it or he took a time-out and had his team watch a replay while standing at the bench?

Originally Posted by mbyron

BTW, in the post-Patriots photography era, I find it difficult to believe that a high school varsity coach would not know this rule.

You make a good point about the publicity, but I believe that the Patriots issue was that they were stealing signs and play calling from tape of the opposing sideline, not simply that video of the game or on field action was being viewed. I've certainly seen still photos that are overhead shots of defensive formations and such being looked at and discussed on NFL sidelines. The video itself wasn't the illegal issue it was what they were specifically attempting to do with the video.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Did I state that it was a penalty? I believe that I said that it was something additional.

Did I say that you stated that it was a penalty? Your post refers to enforcing the penalty on the court and adding something to it; I'm pointing out that this addition is not itself a penalty.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I don't see why you believe that video tape is serious offense. What's so unsporting about video tape anyway. What if they looked at the same tape in pregame? Is it now devious for them to view it again? I'm missing the nastiness of the issue here.

Of course, they could not watch the same tape pre-game because it doesn't exist. The rule prohibits watching game tape of the first half during halftime (10.1.3 Sit. B), not tape from other games, other tapes of the opponent, or Looney Tunes. Maybe you misunderstood the rule.

Given my experience in this area, my sense is that this would be a serious violation. Your sense is different. There's nothing to argue about. If it makes you feel better, I would check with my assigner before reporting it to the state.

[WhistlesAndStripes]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Of course, they could not watch the same tape pre-game because it doesn't exist. The rule prohibits watching game tape of the first half during halftime (10.1.3 Sit. B), not tape from other games, other tapes of the opponent, or Looney Tunes. Maybe you misunderstood the rule.

Actually, if you read the rule from the rulebook, it says no use of TV replay or monitoring equipment or computers, other than for stats.

So, I think that even watching tape from other games, other tapes of the opponent, or Looney Tunes would be a violation of this rule.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Whistles & Stripes

Actually, if you read the rule from the rulebook, it says no use of TV replay or monitoring equipment or computers, other than for stats.

So, I think that even watching tape from other games, other tapes of the opponent, or Looney Tunes would be a violation of this rule.

Ssshhh. Nevada was supposed to look that up and correct me. Now you've ruined it for him.