ouch...talk about losing your cool...

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Ref in PA

I have never heard of a max in my 11 years of officiating.

The only "max" is that if the players left the confines of the bench but did not participate in the fight, then each offender is charged with a flagrant foul and disqualified, but only one technical-foul penalty is administered regardless of the number. Also an indirect to the head coach.

If any person participates in the fight, then they are charged a flagrant technical each, plus one technical for any other bench personnel that leave the bench.

Does that make sense?

[Dan_ref]

Hold on. What about this from the article:

Tuesday morning, DeRenzo received a phone call from the head official of Monday’s night game, and got a clarification on the error that was made.

So you PA guys...why would an official contact an AD to 'clarify' an error? And what might that error be?

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Hold on. What about this from the article:



So you PA guys...why would an official contact an AD to 'clarify' an error? And what might that error be?

The only "error" I can think of if he did in fact get a call from the head official is that they issued techs for each and every non-participant who left the bench which would be wrong per NF....I find this hard to believe that a crew of varsity officials would kick this rule as big as it is, but anything is possible...good question though, I can't ever envision contacting an AD directly, maybe my assignor would after discussing the issue with the referee on the game, but that's about it...

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by kbilla

The only "error" I can think of if he did in fact get a call from the head official is that they issued techs for each and every non-participant who left the bench which would be wrong per NF....I find this hard to believe that a crew of varsity officials would kick this rule as big as it is, but anything is possible....

Say what?

By rule, they were supposed to issue flagrant technical fouls to everybody that left the bench, whether they participated in the fight or not. No matter, what, the 5 players and assistant coach were ejected for those flagrant technical fouls. The difference is in the penalties for the technical fouls for participants and non-participants. For non-participants, it's a max of 2 free throws. For participants, it's 2 free throws for everybody that participates and doesn't match up with someone on the other team.

Rule 10-6PENALTY SUMMARY8(b) 1&2 on p.67.

Iow, that can't be the supposed "error".

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Say what?

By rule, they were supposed to issue flagrant technical fouls to everybody that left the bench, whether they participated in the fight or not. No matter, what, the 5 players and assistant coach were ejected for those flagrant technical fouls. The difference is in the penalties for the technical fouls for participants and non-participants. For non-participants, it's a max of 2 free throws. For participants, it's 2 free throws for everybody that participates and doesn't match up with someone on the other team.

Rule 10-6PENALTY SUMMARY8(b) 1&2 on p.67.

Iow, that can't be the supposed "error".

You are correct, I meant to say that you don't SHOOT the techs for every non-participant, but you do issue the flagrant techs, sorry for the misstatement....so going back to OP, if the AD did in fact get a call from the R, if he admitted a mistake, that is the only mistake that I can think of, that they shot techs for every non-participant...

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I knocked on wood (my head for those who want to know) before I started this post and I will knock on wood as soon as I hit the submit button when I finish this post.

1) The A.D.'s statement were self-serving and I do not believe a word he said about his conversation with the "head official" later that evening.

2) I have been watching basketball games for over 45 years and it is my belief that no bench personnel leaves the bench just to watch a fight. They leave the bench to join the fight.

3) This is my 37th year as a basketball official and only once (boys' H.S. varsity, 1983-84 season) have I had bench personnel leave the bench to join the fight which actually started when fans from both schools entered the court to start fighting with the players immediately after I had called an intentional foul on H1 (H = home team). The foul occured with only about 20 seconds (I don't remember the exact amount left in the game, I don't feel like climbing up into the attic to find my game report) left in the game so my partner, who was the R, and I decided that the best thing to do was to declare the game over.

4) Based upon Item (3), you know why I am knocking on wood agains as soon as I hit the submit button.

MTD, Sr.

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I knocked on wood (my head for those who want to know) before I started this post and I will knock on wood as soon as I hit the submit button when I finish this post.

1) The A.D.'s statement were self-serving and I do not believe a word he said about his conversation with the "head official" later that evening.

2) I have been watching basketball games for over 45 years and it is my belief that no bench personnel leaves the bench just to watch a fight. They leave the bench to join the fight.

3) This is my 37th year as a basketball official and only once (boys' H.S. varsity, 1983-84 season) have I had bench personnel leave the bench to join the fight which actually started when fans from both schools entered the court to start fighting with the players immediately after I had called an intentional foul on H1 (H = home team). The foul occured with only about 20 seconds (I don't remember the exact amount left in the game, I don't feel like climbing up into the attic to find my game report) left in the game so my partner, who was the R, and I decided that the best thing to do was to declare the game over.

4) Based upon Item (3), you know why I am knocking on wood agains as soon as I hit the submit button.

MTD, Sr.

While I agree with you on 2), the distinction that should be made IMO is that you don't penalize "intent", you penalize the act in this case. Regardless of why they leave the bench, if they somehow come to their senses between the time they leave the bench and reach the fracas, if they don't participate, then you can only penalize them for leaving the bench...either way they are gone, but it still matters in terms of adding up the FT's....

[refnrev]

But is the maximum number of shots 2 like Nevada said, or is it that incorrect?

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Hold on. What about this from the article:



So you PA guys...why would an official contact an AD to 'clarify' an error? And what might that error be?

I wonder if the AD had called the assignor or league supervisor of officials that night after the game, and left a message. Then when that assignor or league supervisor called the AD back, that got interpreted as "the head official for the game". Sounds like the reporter didn't really do a very good job of keeping all the facts straight. Didn't talk to both sides.

[refnrev]

So for the record... since we have had different posts stating differeing opinions... The correct procedure would have been how many ejections and how many shots?

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by refnrev

So for the record... since we have had different posts stating differeing opinions... The correct procedure would have been how many ejections and how many shots?

Sounds like we don't know for sure, since we don't have all the facts.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Sounds like we don't know for sure, since we don't have all the facts.

What I always question is, in a situation like this one, how often does anybody get all the facts. If multiple team members leave both benches during a fight, which ends almost as quickly as it began, how often will the officials get even the number of participants, let alone which one actually participated and which one did not.

Happy to say I have never personally witnessed this kind of scene, except once
after a game had ended. Had a couple of parents involved in that one.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by just another ref

What I always question is, in a situation like this one, how often does anybody get [B]all[B] the facts. If multiple team members leave both benches during a fight, which ends almost as quickly as it began, how often will the officials get even the number of participants, let alone which one actually participated and which one did not.

What I meant was that we don't even know what the ref's perspective was, what the ref saw, what the rule really is in PA, etc. The story only tells us what the AD thinks the rule is, and who the AD thinks he talked to, etc.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

I wonder if the AD had called the assignor or league supervisor of officials that night after the game, and left a message. Then when that assignor or league supervisor called the AD back, that got interpreted as "the head official for the game". Sounds like the reporter didn't really do a very good job of keeping all the facts straight. Didn't talk to both sides.

errr....OK...that could happen...

Or just maybe one of the officials called the AD like the article said.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

errr....OK...that could happen...

Or just maybe one of the officials called the AD like the article said.

Yea, could be. But from the way the story is worded, it seems possible that there's an alternate explanation. I know that here in Portland, the official that was on the game would NEVER be involved in that kind of phone call. But perhaps in PA things are different.