Player ejected - adult supervision

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Where do I begin with all of the people who have said I am wrong.


Lets begin with NFHS Casebook Play 10.5 SITUATION: (a) The head coach is charged (directly or indirectly) with a third technical foul, or a second direct technical; or (b) A1 commits a flagrant technical foul against B1.

Pay close attention to the RULING for (a):

RULING: In (a), the coach shall leave the vicinity or the playing area and have no further contact with the team. The official has no option and may not set aside the provision which requires removal. This also applies to all adult bench personnel who receive two technical fouls. In (b), the flagrant technical foul disqualifies A1 from further participation in the contest. A disqualified team member or student bench personnel shall go to or remain on the bench. However, in an unusual situation, an official has the authority to require that these individuals who have committed a flagrant technical foul must leave the vicinity of the court. This action is necessary when permitting such offenders to remain at courtside would tend to incite the crowd, to incite the opponents, or to subject the officials, opponents or others administering the game, to unsporting harassment. In such circumstances, the official should require the individual who has committed a flagrant foul to leave the vicinity of the court with an adult supervisor. It must be emphasized that an official does have this authority, when the circumstances resulting from any flagrant foul warrant it. (10-5 Note 2)


The officials have the final word on what happens to the disqualified player. The disqualified player cannot leave the team bench Unless the player is supervised by an adult. No adult supervision, means the player stays remains on the team bench. The Head Coach cannot just send the player to the lockerroom without adult supervision and the officials shall not allow the Head Coach to send the disqualified player to the lockerroom.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. lpbreeze: The disqualified player in your scenario is your responsibility.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Where do I begin with all of the people who have said I am wrong.


Lets begin with NFHS Casebook Play 10.5 SITUATION: (a) The head coach is charged (directly or indirectly) with a third technical foul, or a second direct technical; or (b) A1 commits a flagrant technical foul against B1.

Pay close attention to the RULING for (a):

RULING: In (a), the coach shall leave the vicinity or the playing area and have no further contact with the team. The official has no option and may not set aside the provision which requires removal. This also applies to all adult bench personnel who receive two technical fouls. In (b), the flagrant technical foul disqualifies A1 from further participation in the contest. A disqualified team member or student bench personnel shall go to or remain on the bench. However, in an unusual situation, an official has the authority to require that these individuals who have committed a flagrant technical foul must leave the vicinity of the court. This action is necessary when permitting such offenders to remain at courtside would tend to incite the crowd, to incite the opponents, or to subject the officials, opponents or others administering the game, to unsporting harassment. In such circumstances, the official should require the individual who has committed a flagrant foul to leave the vicinity of the court with an adult supervisor. It must be emphasized that an official does have this authority, when the circumstances resulting from any flagrant foul warrant it. (10-5 Note 2)


The officials have the final word on what happens to the disqualified player. The disqualified player cannot leave the team bench Unless the player is supervised by an adult. No adult supervision, means the player stays remains on the team bench. The Head Coach cannot just send the player to the lockerroom without adult supervision and the officials shall not allow the Head Coach to send the disqualified player to the lockerroom.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. lpbreeze: The disqualified player in your scenario is the responsibility.

once again i disagree -- your caseplay speaks to the official HAVING to request the player to leave the playing area -- NOT the coach

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by deecee

once again i disagree -- your caseplay speaks to the official HAVING to request the player to leave the playing area -- NOT the coach

Read the fourth (4th) sentence in the Casebook Play RULING. It says and I quote: "A disqualified team member or student bench personnel shall go to or remain on the bench." That means just what it says. It does not say that the player shall go where the coach wants the player to go. Having said, if the Head Coach wants the player in the lockerroom with adult supervision, then by all means the officials should allow it. The intent of the rule is to insure that the player or student bench personnel who are disqualified are under adult supervisioin at all times. If the disqualified non-adult participant is not going to be supervised by an adult while in the lockerroom then the disqualified non-adult participant must stay on the team bench.

I just don't understand why officials think that when a Head Coach says: "Trust me." That officials will trust him. Trusting a coach is a sure way for an official and his family to end up living in a house trailer for the next 20 or 30 years.

MTD, Sr.

[lpbreeze]

in my case he literally just walked off the floor and out of the gym and there wasn't a time for an adult or the coach to say anything. I was a player in the game actually.
So can an ejected player get another tech if he stays around? or give it to the coach I guess.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by lpbreeze

in my case he literally just walked off the floor and out of the gym and there wasn't a time for an adult or the coach to say anything. I was a player in the game actually.
So can an ejected player get another tech if he stays around? or give it to the coach I guess.

In your case the answer is neither. The officials should have ascertained whether the player was under adult supervision. If the player was not under adult supervision they needed to get his tuchus back on the bench.

MTD, Sr.

[chartrusepengui]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Read the fourth (4th) sentence in the Casebook Play RULING. It says and I quote: "A disqualified team member or student bench personnel shall go to or remain on the bench." That means just what it says. It does not say that the player shall go where the coach wants the player to go. Having said, if the Head Coach wants the player in the lockerroom with adult supervision, then by all means the officials should allow it. The intent of the rule is to insure that the player or student bench personnel who are disqualified are under adult supervisioin at all times. If the disqualified non-adult participant is not going to be supervised by an adult while in the lockerroom then the disqualified non-adult participant must stay on the team bench.

I just don't understand why officials think that when a Head Coach says: "Trust me." That officials will trust him. Trusting a coach is a sure way for an official and his family to end up living in a house trailer for the next 20 or 30 years.

MTD, Sr.

A player shall go to or remain on the bench to means that if the Flag T was called on bench personnel - they are to remain there and if called on a player - they are to go to the bench. Once on the bench - and the coach feels they need to go to locker room and sends them there it is no longer my responsibility IMO unless they create some kind of disturbance along the way that warrants my attention.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Trusting a coach is a sure way for an official and his family to end up living in a house trailer for the next 20 or 30 years.

In the words of my pre-teen daughter: "Exaggerate much?"

[jdw3018]

We're obviously going to disagree, MTD. I've seen nothing in the citation you have that makes me believe a coach cannot send a DQ'd team member - or any other member - to the locker room. If a player loses his contact and they forgot to bring saline solution to the bench, I'm not going to stop him from running to the locker room.

It's the same reason when I was in Kansas I didn't stop a player in a JV game from going to the locker room so he wouldn't be an eligible substitute. I see nothing different here in terms of my responsibility as an official.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

We're obviously going to disagree, MTD. I've seen nothing in the citation you have that makes me believe a coach cannot send a DQ'd team member - or any other member - to the locker room. If a player loses his contact and they forgot to bring saline solution to the bench, I'm not going to stop him from running to the locker room.

It's the same reason when I was in Kansas I didn't stop a player in a JV game from going to the locker room so he wouldn't be an eligible substitute. I see nothing different here in terms of my responsibility as an official.

You would be wrong in Kansas to allow a team to play shorthanded when they have an eligilble player, because NFHS Rules do not allow the team to play shorthanded; if the player has not been disqualfied and is not injured and has quarters to play, then that player must play. From your previous posts, Kansas has a quarters per day rule like Ohio does. If a player has only played in the first three quarters of the JV game and the VAR Coach doesn't want her to play the fourth quarter of the JV game so that she will have a quarter of eligibility for the VAR game, that is fine, but if that player is one of only five players eligilbe to play in the fourth quarter of the JV game she must play in the JV game. Too bad about the VAR game. Remember what NFHS Rules say about playing shorthanded.

NFHS Rules also state that a disqualified player or a disqualified non-adult bench personel shall stay on the bench unless he is under the supervision of an adult.

MTD, Sr.

[Mark Padgett]

MTD, just curious, not critical - what if a coach tells a kid to go to the locker room during a game for some other reason, like to change his socks or something (OK - poor example, but it happens)? Do you feel it's your responsibility to see to it that an adult goes with him? I certainly don't. And if you don't either, what's the difference as to the reason he goes to the locker room?

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

MTD, just curious, not critical - what if a coach tells a kid to go to the locker room during a game for some other reason, like to change his socks or something (OK - poor example, but it happens)? Do you feel it's your responsibility to see to it that an adult goes with him? I certainly don't. And if you don't either, what's the difference as to the reason he goes to the locker room?

Thanks, Mark, this is the point I was trying to make.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

MTD, just curious, not critical - what if a coach tells a kid to go to the locker room during a game for some other reason, like to change his socks or something (OK - poor example, but it happens)? Do you feel it's your responsibility to see to it that an adult goes with him? I certainly don't. And if you don't either, what's the difference as to the reason he goes to the locker room?

You are comparing apples to oranges. The NFHS rule about adult supervision concerns non-adult participants (players, substitutes, and other bench personel) that have been disqualified. See my post just before your post.

MTD, Sr.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

You would be wrong in Kansas to allow a team to play shorthanded when they have an eligilble player, because NFHS Rules do not allow the team to play shorthanded; if the player has not been disqualfied and is not injured and has quarters to play, then that player must play. From your previous posts, Kansas has a quarters per day rule like Ohio does. If a player has only played in the first three quarters of the JV game and the VAR Coach doesn't want her to play the fourth quarter of the JV game so that she will have a quarter of eligibility for the VAR game, that is fine, but if that player is one of only five players eligilbe to play in the fourth quarter of the JV game she must play in the JV game. Too bad about the VAR game. Remember what NFHS Rules say about playing shorthanded.

And I know we've discussed this before, but if the coach tells me the player is no longer able to play and that player is no longer on the bench in uniform, then I'm not asking why he isn't able anymore. That is accepted practice where I used to be. We don't have this issue here, as SC doesn't have the same practices regarding quarter rules and typically JV and V games are not on the same day.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

You are comparing apples to oranges. The NFHS rule about adult supervision concerns non-adult participants (players, substitutes, and other bench personel) that have been disqualified. See my post just before your post.

MTD, Sr.

And I interpret the ruling about adult supervision only applies to a disqualified player who you, as an official, direct to leave the bench area. If his coach directs him to leave, this ruling doesn't apply.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

And I know we've discussed this before, but if the coach tells me the player is no longer able to play and that player is no longer on the bench in uniform, then I'm not asking why he isn't able anymore. That is accepted practice where I used to be. We don't have this issue here, as SC doesn't have the same practices regarding quarter rules and typically JV and V games are not on the same day.

You are missing the point. The third quarter of the JV game ends with Team A having five players on the court and those are the only five remaining players that are eligible. You get ready to start the fourth quarter and Team A has only four players return to the court, and the reason is that the fifth player has not taken the court is because the VAR Coach wants her to save a quarter for the VAR game: TOO bad. NFHS Rules require Team A to put five players on the court because they have five eligible players remaining. Team A must have their fifth player return from the locker room and play in the fourth quarter of the JV game. If Team A refuses to start the fourth quarter for five players, then it loses the game by forfiet (dang I hope I spelled that word correctly). There is nothing really difficult about this rule. Just enforce it.

MTD, Sr.