From the 1st Year: Created a little test for myself...

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by ca_rumperee

I have 3 players on floor given Flagrant Fouls: 1 W, 2 B
----all 3 are disqualified
I have 3 fighting players from bench given Flagrant fouls: 1 W, 2 B
---all 3 are disqualified
I have 6 bench players who left bench to break it up: 5 W, 1 B
---all 6 are disqualified.
so, 12 players disqualified: 7 W 5B

I'm nitpicking your terminology here. By definition there can only be a maximum of 10 players at any point in the game. The people on the bench aren't "players." See 4-34-1.

Originally Posted by ca_rumperee

Free Throws:
Floor players fighting: Team W shoots 2 FTs
Bench players fighting: Team W shoots 2 FTs
Bench players NOT fighting: unequal number, maximum of 1 technical , so Team B shoots 2 FTS

Who gets the ball? Dunno

This case book play demonstrates that the FTs from categories 2 and 3 can offset. The NFHS has never issued one that clearly shows that categories 1 and 2 or 1 and 3 can cancel, but I believe that the intent is for them to do so. It greatly simplifies the process to do it that way. I'd love to see the federation clarify this point.


10.4.5 SITUATION E: A1 and B1 begin fighting and play is stopped. Substitute A6 leaves the bench area and enters the court to observe. B6 also enters the court at the same time, but B6 actually participates in the fight. RULING: A1, B1, A6 and B6 are all disqualified. No free throws result from the double flagrant foul by A1 and B1 or from the simultaneous technical fouls by A6 and B6. Each head coach is charged with one indirect technical foul. Play resumes at the point of interruption. (4-36; 10-3-9)

[ca_rumperee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I'm nitpicking your terminology here. By definition there can only be a maximum of 10 players at any point in the game. The people on the bench aren't "players." See 4-34-1.

I tried to avoid that mistake. Failed. Language is important.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

This case book play demonstrates that the FTs from categories 2 and 3 can offset. The NFHS has never issued one that clearly shows that categories 1 and 2 or 1 and 3 can cancel, but I believe that the intent is for them to do so. It greatly simplifies the process to do it that way. I'd love to see the federation clarify this point.

I've had this question in several pre-games this year, as there have been a strangely high number of fights around my area this year (only one "incident" that I was an official for, and it didn't have any actual fighting), and nobody seems to agree, though the consensus is that Ts for fighting by players are handled separately from Ts for bench personnel fighting and bench personnel simply leaving the bench.

I don't agree, but that's what the more seasoned officials have all agreed on around here. I'm with you that the NFHS issuing a clear ruling would be handy.

[Nevadaref]

I used to hold that same opinion myself, but have recently changed. If the bench reaction is clearly after the players on the court start going at it, I have no problem handling it that way, but if all of the mess happens more or less at the same time or the spark incident isn't observed then how does one know what took place first?

What if a team member on the bench starts it by saying something to an opposing player and then there are people running all over the place?

My current advice is to keep it as simple as possible and shoot as few FTs as necessary.