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

http://waytogogenius.com/?p=30

What a way to lose...practice will definately not be fun tomorrow.

Sounds as if a crew needs to hit the books.
 

The PIAA does a good job of stating that the officials kicked the rule and the school does a great thing in acknowledging that their actions were totally wrong and that they need to learn from that.

For the record, a maximum of two FTs can be awarded no matter how many team members leave the bench during an altercation as long as none of them engage in the fight. If they participate, then each is penalized with 2 FTs. These FTs could be offset by whatever penalties are handed out to the opposing team if they also enter the court.

PS In NV we have a bench-clearing rule that states if three or more individuals leave the bench, then the game is over and that team forfeits. If both teams do so, then the contest is ruled a double-forfeit.

Howinthe hell can you possibly know that the officials actually kicked the rule? The description of the play said <i>"the players and the assistant coach <b>joined</b> the fray."</i> If they actually "joined the fray", then maybe they were "participants" and the issuing of 12 FT's was the correct call, by rule. In situations like this, I usually like to hear the official's story also. I'm kinda funny like that.

I also fail to see where the PIAA did <b>anything</b>, according to the story posted. All I can see is a possibly biased account given by the AD of the team that had 6 people come off the bench.

Maybe the officials actually did screw it up. It's still never a good idea to rely solely on what a fanboy AD is saying.

Yep, you are right. The story doesn't say that an official from the PIAA called and discussed the error, it says that it was the head official from the game! :eek: I blitzed through that too quickly.

"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."

It still seems that the rule was kicked.

That was my point. DeRenzo is the AD and he is the one that is saying that an error was made. Could be, but suspicious ol' me learned a long time ago to get both sides of a story before forming an opinion. Imo, the jury is still out on this one.

I took a quick look at the PIAA website. It says that ejection reports have to be handed in for all regular season games, and anybody ejected- coach or player- has to sit out a minimum of one more game. Soooooo, the story said that it wasn't a league game, but was it considered a regular season game? Maybe somebody from Pa. can enlighten us. If so, the 5 players and the assistant coach should be getting a vacation.

From the AD: "DeRenzo pointed out that three ejections and three technical fouls is the most that can be dished out on one whistle, according to his interpretation of the PIAA basketball rules."

As soon as I read this, I questioned the accuracy of the rest of the AD's claim.

As JR pointed out, if 6 people come off the bench and all participate in the melee, I have 12 free throws for the other team.

It's the modern-day equivalent of "three on a match."

To my knowledge, all HS in PIAA belong to some conference or league, based on the size and geographic location of the school. League play usually begins towards the end of December with teams playing each other twice. Prior to league play are games sometimes referred to as exhibition games. These games count as regular season games, but are not part of the league standings. There are some HS out there that are not part of the PIAA for some reason or another. Most are religious schools. I also seem to remember that some HS in Philly were not part of the PIAA in certain sports.

To answer the second question: Ejected players and coaches must sit out a game at the same level and the refs have to fill out paperwork with the PIAA asap.

I have never heard of a max in my 11 years of officiating. I have seen the PIAA cave and not enforce the rules. A few years ago a fight broke out in the State Championship game which left 3 players from one team and 4 from the other as non participants in the fight. The refs wanted to continue like that, but the PIAA overseer at the game overruled the officials and only one player was ejected - the star player for one of the teams. What happened was A1 was given a throw-in in front of B's bench. B6 kicked his leg up between the legs of A1 during the throw-in. Fight ensued. A1 was the only player ejected and the next year we got a policy to never administer a throw-in in front of an opposing team's bench.

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?

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...

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...

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....

This actually leads to an intersting question though, how do you define "participates"? If he pulls a teammate off of the pile did he participate? What if he pulls an opponent off? I realize at that point you are gonna have your hands full and honestly if someone put their hands on someone else, ESPECIALLY an opponent, I am probably going to charge them with participating, but how do you all define "participating"?

Any kind of contact with an opponent.

This is what happens when some coaches and ADs try to interpret the rules all by themselves.

Any player/coach ejected in a PIAA contest is suspended for the next play date. So yes, the coach and the 5 players would all be getting a day off. The PIAA actually changed the rule this year regarding suspensions. It used to be that the player ejection in a game was suspended for any game at any level the remainder of that day (e.g. a JV/V player ejected in the JV game was also done for the V game) and the next game at the level ejected at (so JV/V player would be done for the next JV game, but not the next varsity). Now, the ejected player/coach is done for the rest of the day ejected, plus the entire next play date at all levels. There is some debate about what happens if the JVs and Vs play on different dates.

As far as league vs. regular season game. Each district in PA is divided into sections/conferences/leagues depending on what part of the state you are in. Here in the Western part of the state, most teams play a 14 game section/conference schedule, and approx. 8-10 non-section/exhibition games, which are regular season games, but do not ultimately count towards qualification for playoffs (but do count for seedings).

Iowa, I think, does the ejection thing right. If you get ejected from a game, you miss everything up until you miss the next game at the same level you were ejected from.

IOW, if you get ejected from a JV game, you can't participate at any level until you have served your suspension for the next JV game.

kbilla:

You are correct, you can't penalize intent in this case, but I have never seen a player or coach or other bench personnel, leave the bench and not participate. Why leave the bench, when you have a ring side seat to the fight in the first place. And as the father of two teenage boys, I know that they sometimes don't come to their sense until it is too late. Having said that, I can assure you that my two youngin's are well behaved when it comes to the nonsense that was the subject of the original post. NFHS Baseball Rules stipulate that anybody that leaves the dugout to join a fight on the field is ejected and OhioHSAA Rules stipulate a two game suspension at that level are played before a player can resume play. My older son two years ago incurred the wrath of the Toledo Start H.S. jr. varsity baseball coach because he was the only player that refused to leave the dugout to join a fight on the field. My son set him straight (and so did I later, because to describe this young punk, the coach I mean, as a horse's rear end would be an insult to the two horses that my wife and I have owned). The coach got mad at me because I had taught his son to be a good sportsman. LOL.

Mark, Jr., will take the OhioHSAA umpiring class this winter and the umpires who have umpired his games in the past can't wait for him to join their ranks because he is the only player in his games that has a level head out there. Just a chip off the old block. But I am really looking forward to Thursday of next week when Mark, Jr. and I officiate his first basketball game. We have a boys' jr. H.S. DH and I can't wait for him to carry his "old man" for two games.

MTD, Sr.

Good for you Mark, my first son is only 9mos old and I already can't wait for the day when we get to work our first game together....my wife just shakes her head, but what does she know anyway:D

Or, I'd add, attempting to contact an opponent.

Maz'l Tov, Mark.

I can only begin to describe the exquisite pleasure I derive from working with any of my 3 sons who officiate. Hope your experience is memorable and enjoyable...

Be sure to let us know how it went, and if you owed him any refreshments afterwards!!!!!!

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.

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.

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

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

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

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.

Who knows?

We don't know whether the players and coach coming off the bench participated in the fight or not. That's the key to the number of FT's that are handed out. If they came off the bench and didn't participate, each player and the assistant coach would get a flagrant technical foul, but there would only be a maximum of 2 FT's shot. If the players and the assistant coach participated, then they all would still receive a flagrant technical foul, but the other team would now receive 2 FT's for each opponent that participated.

To know if the play was called correctly, you have to know <b>exactly</b> which players/coach participated in the fight(if any) and which didn't. we don't have that information.

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.

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.

I agree.
The AD isn't necessarily wrong. Remember he is referring to a PIAA interp. We don't know exactly what that says. My state has a bench-clearing provision that immediately terminates the game. If three or more individuals leave a team bench, we're done. We are to assess all of the Ts, but not administer the FTs and then write the report. The PIAA could have something similar.


The same is true here, but it occurred to me that in an area where the games are assigned by the ADs and the officials have to contact those folks for games, not an association or office, then it would be logical for such a phone call to take place. Someone from PA will have to chime in and let us know how the assignments are handled in that area.

Good point.

Maybe he/she/they can clarify whether or not PA deviates from the NFHS on flagrant technicals during a bench-clearing fight as well.

They do. See post #9. ;)

I remember a thread about that mess on this forum.

Then what were you referring to in post #35? :D

Yes he is...100% wrong. I went to the PIAA Web site looking for this phantom interpretation...and surprise, it does not exist. This is the interpretation the PIAA printed last season. Nothing it printed this year covers this topic, so clearly this is where things stand:

PLAYERS LEAVING THE BENCH :<o></o>
Players leaving the bench during an altercation or when a fight may break out are assessed a flagrant technical foul whether they participate in the fight or not. That means that every one of the players are ejected to the bench and disqualified from participation the very next game at that level. The two players who are involved in the altercation are also charged with double flagrant personal fouls or double flagrant technical fouls depending on whether the altercation took place while the ball was live or during a dead ball situation. They also are ejected to the bench and disqualified from participation the next game at that level. Each technical will count toward the bonus. We know that we do not shoot any fouls for double personals or double technicals. As for the players coming off the bench, if there an equal number for both teams, then they would cancel out each since they are classified as simultaneous technicals. If, they are unequal, we will only shoot one technical foul no matter what the disproportional number is, if they do not participate in the altercation. However, if they do participate, we will shoot one technical for each disproportional number. For example, three A players come off the bench and five B players come off the bench and do not participate, even though the disproportionate number is two, we will only shoot one technical.<o></o>
Using the same example, only this time they do participate, the disproportionate number is two so we will shoot two technicals. Also, the head coaches are assessed one indirect technical foul no matter how many come off the bench and do not participate. However, for those who participate, the head coaches will be assessed one indirect technical for each participant. Remember, if you have a double personal or technical on the floor, and a corresponding number of players coming off the bench from both teams, we will administer the throw-in from the point of interruption. If we have a disproportionate number coming off the bench, we will administer the throw-in at the division line opposite the table after the free throws have been completed.<o></o>

COMMENT: Disproportionate number of players come off the benches and do not participate, the maximum penalty is one technical. Disproportionate number of players come off the benches and do participate, one technical for each.

Source: PIAA 2006-2007 Basketball Bulletin II, Rules, Revisions, and Interpretations January 2007

The fight at the State Championship was "special." The PIAA governing official overruled the court officials who had the correct ruling of ejecting just about everyone. In the interest of playing a "championship" game, the governing official used his authority to set aside the NFHS rules. Hopefully that was a one time thing, but you never know. :mad:

To my knowledge, PA does not deviate from the NFHS on flagrant technicals during a bench-clearing fight. The number of bench personnel that left the bench area and the number that participated in the fight would determine the number of Free Throws to be shot.

The only person I would call if I were a ref on the game would be to my assignor. I would have to fill out additional paperwork to send to the PIAA concerning the incident. The Assignor would deal with the AD at the school. No way would I call anyone at a school about an incident. In fact, should something like this happen in a game, my procedures would be:

1. (During the game) Record time of incident, who was involved, level of involvement, penalty. I would have the scorekeeper record that information in the official book.
2. (After the game, before leaving the court) Get all the information from the official scorer.
3. (After the game, with partners) Review information, add details if needed. Make sure we are all in agreement with what happened.
4. Call assignor, giving oral details.
5. Write up incident, give copy to partners, assignor, PIAA.

These procedures are just my own thoughts, not anything sanctioned by the PIAA other than letting the PIAA know. My local chapter wants us to inform the assignor of all technical fouls.

If the school wants details, they can contact the assignor or the PIAA. They can review the film. If it turns out the crew misapplied the rules (by giving more Free Throws than merited), I am sure the assignor will tell the crew.

This is actually the district in which I work. Assignments are made by an assignor, not the schools. We are actually expected to communicate with schools only for logistical concerns (i.e. time of game, confirming assignments, etc.). Any matters relating to the game itself are to be funneled through the assignor. This is not to say that the officials on the game (I do not know who had the game, so have not talked with these guys) did not deviate from this and actually call the AD, but they are not supposed to.

A forfeit often comes with the losing team doing so with a score of 20-0 or perhaps 2-0. The point here is that the team forfeiting is assigned 0 points. The winning team then, must be assigned something greater than 0 points. That's where the typical 20 or 2 points comes in.

In a double forfeit, is each team assigned 0 points? If so, then you have a tie game, and therefore each team could score 1 point in the standings.

Or, could each team be assigned a loss? If that is true, how could a team lose when they don't score less points than their opponent?

Just wondering. :)

There are clearly a number of places here where the officials could have erred based on the facts we do know. We know that there was a pushing foul by B1 on A1, which precipitated a fight in which 6 bench personnel from team A left the bench. While it's not clear who participated and who didn't, we know that two players at a minimum on the floor faught and should've been ejected with double flagrant Ts. We don't know if anyone else on the floor participated in the fight on either side. Based on the penalty enforcement, if all 6 bench personnel participated in the fight, the HC should have been ejected as well, and it's clear he was not from the article. Also, team A would've been entitled to FTs for the original foul, which it's not clear whether they were attempted. So it's clear that the officials probably erred in some way, but not in any way close to the whacked out interpretation provided by the AD.

I agree with Mark, you don't leave the bench unless you're gonna participate in the fight. Without video, it is nearly impossible for the officials to determine precisely who actively participated and who was "pulling people off" particularly when there's no way of defining participant. If bench personnel is in the melee, chances are I will rule that he was a participant without the benefit of video.

The comments of the AD were a joke in my opinion, and I'm not talking about his rules interpretation. He expresses no remorse for the actions of his team and his coach nor has he taken any action. I coach HS baseball, and if I left the bench to participate in a fight, or even if my players did, I would be held responsible and probably lose my job the next day. No accountability, and for him to blame the officiating for mistakes is unbelievable. Take responsibility and take action at the HS level, don't blame the refs because your entire team was out of control and the coaches that you hired lacked control. Judging by the final score, it was not a very well played game either...

Thinking about this - correct me if I am wrong but this is situation where in NCAA, you can go to the monitor to clean everything up - who gets Ts etc.

With pretty much almost every school taping games these days, I wonder if NFHS should consider allowing officials to use any means available to them in order to clean a mess like this up. If that means getting the camera down from row 50 to see who all left the bench / threw punches, why not?

Nope, we don't know that. The rule doesn't say that there has to be a fight. It also provides for when a fight MAY break out. There could have just been a flare-up of emotions.

Wrong twice. There may have simply been an altercation on the floor that wasn't a fight and didn't warrant any penalties, yet stirred the tempers and emotions of those on the bench and they overreacted.

A good point.

Not true, perhaps they were not in the bonus yet.

That opinion expressed by both of you has been proven false. Evidence to the contrary occurred in the Phoenix Suns/San Antonio Spurs playoff series.

So you just skipped over these words? :confused: :
---------------
DeRenzo said. “We are not appealing the game. It’s not a league game, we did some things wrong and our team needs to learn and grow from this experience.”

DeRenzo was more concerned with the reactions of the adults in the melee, specifically an assistant coach that left the bench.

“The officials made a mistake and the kids will learn a valuable lesson, but the adults needed to do a better job of being role models for the kids,” said DeRenzo, who didn’t rule out a possible suspension of an assistant coach.
-------------------------------

What a stupid statement.:mad: A low score is NOT indicative of a poorly played game. There could have been excellent defense. Long offensive possessions while working for a quality shot attempt. The kid hit 11 of 12 FTs at the end so obviously there was skill on the floor. Could you make 11 of 12? :eek: