Too many players on the court
 

Middle School AAU game played under NFHS rules.

After a timeout, the other team sent 6 players on the court. We brought the ball up from the backcourt to the frontcourt, when I noticed they had 6. I yelled to the ref, they have 6 on the court. The other coach heard me yelling, and yelled "So and so, get off the court!". His played stepped off the court right in front of the ref, and hustled back to the bench. I ended up getting a technical, for complaining that they didn't call a technical on them. They admitted they saw it, but ignored it.

I'm not complaining about my 'T' (I deserved it). But, are refs reluctant to call this 'T', because perhaps it's their fault for not counting and signaling?

Unfortunately, there are some spineless refs out there that won't call it becaus they think it's their fault. They're wrong. It's not their fault; or the rules committee wouldn't have this be a technical foul.

Some don't want to call it in AAU games. I think they're wrong, too (although I leave a bit more room for discussion here). I'd have called the T.

That said, if the refs never counted until after the player had left the court, it's not a T, as it needs to be discovered while being violated in order to be a technical foul.

Counting players prior to making the ball live is a pretty basic practice of basketball officiating. Sounds like you had a crew that was somewhat lacking in that area.

That being said, it is still ultimately the coach's responsibility to only put five players on the court. It should be called a T regardless.

Absolutely correct.

Absolutely correct.

Unfortunately, there were many mistakes made on this one.

Mistake #1: Coach failed to send only 5 players to the court.

Mistake #2: the officials either:

• didn't use the mechanic to ensure only 5 players per team are on the court
• ignored the illegal act
• followed the mechanic and missed the 6th player

While it is the coach's ultimate responsibility for fielding the correct number of players, the officials do have mechanics to catch cases where more than or less than 5 players are on the court from one team.

Mistake #3: The officials also should have assessed a technical foul against the team that had 6 players.

Mistake #4: I also believe that they should not have issued a technical foul against you for your informing the officials of your opponents having 6 players, unless you did so in an unsporting manner.

All in all, it sounds like 4 large mistakes were made.

I'm guessing Coach Bill probably crossed the "unsporting manner" line, as he did say in his OP that he "deserved" it.

The misapplication of one rule does not mean an official shouldn't enforce another and call a technical foul when warranted.

True, but in this case, it would have been prevented.

Well, sure, if any of the previous three "mitakes" hadn't been committed, it probably would have prevented the mistakes following. I just disagree that #4 is a mistake like the others.

My take on the OP gives me the same impression.

Coach,

What did you yell to the officials?

"Can't you f**king count?" :)

I cannot believe we are holding officials that are working an AAU Middle school game at a high standard. Scared to all a T? Four mistakes? I am sure the officials working the game were not the best officials around the area considering this is an off season middle school AAU game. Just an observation.

Peace

Where do we draw the line on this? If you see A1 go to the bench, then count 5 more players on the court would you call it then?

At that point, is Team A violating the prohibition against having more than five players on the court?

They were up until A1 stepped off the court, which the officials saw in the OP.

WARNING reading this post could pose a serious risk to your health. Severe system shock is possible.

I agree with that. http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...ges/faint2.gif

Wow!! you really must be sick or something.;)

We learned that a long time ago. ;)

Peace

So what? It doesn't change that mistakes were made.

Granted, these officials might have less experience, but if they're worth anything, they will have learned from the situation.

And Rut, where did it previously say that the officials were scared to call a T? Snaq said spineless, but that's it. You're adding information that has no history or place in the thread. In fact, they did issue a T: against the coach who did know the rule!

I don't think we're commenting on a standard...just analyzing a situation presented by a coach. It wouldn't be very useful to say "Ah, just an AAU game...they're probably not good officials....who cares?"

oh wait...I see that's part of you signature.

Since I said it, I'll defend it. I've seen the comments here about officials who will do everything they can, including turning a blind eye, to avoid this T because they're absolutely convinced it's their fault. Those are the ones I call spineless; at the very least, they're ignorant of the rules. Also, some officials are more willing to try to let this slide at the AAU level; especially if the player was already on his way off the court and there had been no real advantage gained. That's not spineless, it's a philosophical opinion on how to officiate lower level games.

Finally, we're not holding them to any particular standard. I worked a lot of lower level games before I started to get a good grasp of the rules and proper procedures; someone pointing out my mistakes wouldn't have been out of place, and I wouldn't have considered them to be holding me to some inappropriate standard.

Snaqs - this is interesting verbiage to me and leads me back to an earlier thread - slamming the ball on the court and having it bounce half-way to the ceiling and not calling the T because of the "level of the game".....

I am still trying to learn, understand, and properly use the "what's ok at what level and what age" philosphy and sometimes find it difficult, especially after reading the differing opinions on the board. Makes good reading and food for thought for me though......and I certainly appreciate everyone's differing opinions as they add to my kit bag......

I think part of what makes it difficult, on the surface, is there doesn't seem to be consistency. On the one hand, there are some saying they wouldn't call the T for slamming the ball there because of the high level of the game. (Note, there are some who wouldn't call that, period, when looking at the play in question and all the game factors not related to the level.) On the other hand, some would give more leeway to the 6 player T in lower level games that they wouldn't give at higher level games.

Personally, I think it's because they're different kind of Ts. One, sportsmanship, is highly subjective anyway. What passes for unsportsmanlike behavior at the high school level is not the same as the college. A perfect example is swearing. In high school, we're told to call the T regardless of to whom the swearing is directed. When a kid throws a bad pass and shouts "Sh!t!" our hands are tied. I don't think that's the case in college.

Administrative Ts (in which I'd include the 6 player rule) are different, and we often given more leeway at lower levels. I've never even heard of a T being called at a JV game for not having the lineups in 10 minutes prior to game time, for example.

That is a really good breakdown. Since I am new I don't have the knowledge or experience to get involved in the different interpretations of things like this. But, as I read through the posts on the different interpretations of the situations I find it really interesting. It's nice for a new guy to see the different views on the situations. I guess I will form my own opinions with experience, but reading these posts really help me to look at the situations from all views.

Here you go.

If you are spineless, that means you are afraid to stand up and do the right thing. You do not call people with courage spineless.

Peace

Yes you are. AAU Basketball at any level is a mixed bag of standards and application of basic situations, let alone rules. Often times you do not even have a regular substitution process where players actually go to the table like during the regular season. I have worked games where the table was not in the right place and how timeouts are handled can be very disorganized as it relates to actual rules. And you add to that the level of experience of the officials, the quality of the table personnel or even the court configuration and you have all levels of confusion for everyone involved.

Peace

I suppose, in context, it might not be as clear, but I was not calling these particular officials spineless. There may be other reasons they didn't call it, and I have stated those reasons here in this particular thread.

My statement above was in direct response to the following question from the OP:
It was a generic answer to a generic question.

If you are referring to the situation that took place in the National Championship game this ball never was half-way to the ceiling. The player that slammed the ball was not mad at an official's call or doing anything in frustration other than what he had not done. And if you heard a lot of veterans on this site talk, they suggested this would not have been a T at any level. Not JH, wreak, HS varsity, Division 3, Division 2 or Pro-Am.

Peace

My point is there are probably multiple facets to this situation. And I am sure if you asked the officials what they saw; they might have another story behind what took place. Just because this was not called does not mean the officials noticed and turned the other cheek. It could be they simply did not see the 6 player as the coach thinks (and why we are just taking a coach's word alone is curious to me in the first place). I would have never had a problem if we just gave the rule and said what should have taken place. But to automatically assume the officials just decided not to make a call to me was a little over the top considering the level and likely the circumstances.

Peace

Which really isn't all that different than what I have written, in aggregate, during this thread.

:confused:

Interesting, that is what the coach says. It must be true. Just like the officials in the article that referenced in another thread told coaches to sit down and shut up. ;)

Peace

I took coach at his word, sure. I had no reason not to. He didn't claim anything that seemed outrageous. If I didn't think he was telling the truth, I'd have no reason to respond. Are we to assume all coaches are lying when they come here? That sounds overly skeptical, and I'm as skeptical as anyone.

But when they saw A1 step off the court, they didn't know that there were still five players left. IMO, no T in this case.

THIS IS A MIDDLE SCHOOL AAU GAME!!!! I seriously doubt that the officials were afraid to do much of anything. I do not care what the coach says. A coach's point of view is very different than an official's point of view. I am sure six on the court is not only the biggest priority of the game, but a lot of other rules on uniforms, coaching boxes and I am sure all the mechanics are not used by the book and you come out as if the officials are afraid to enforce a rule? In some cases they are lucky they get two officials in the first place. My point is we need to have a little perspective.

Peace

Rut, calm down dude.

Another example why some here need perspective badly. What is there to calm down about? ;)

Peace

To Mark Dexter: "But when they saw A1 step off the court, they didn't know that there were still five players left. IMO, no T in this case."

Wouldn't you have either:

1. Too many players
2. A player voluntarily leaving the playing court.
3. A player away from the bench area.

Aren't these all cases for a 'T'? You had to have something.

And, the refs admitted they saw him, but "He got off the court quickly, so we let it go". I got the 'T' for unsportingly asking "How can you just ignore the rules like that!!!"

For the record, Coach Bill and I are not related nor am I posting under another name. ;)

Rut, you're not saying anything here I disagree with. My point about spineless refs was not directed at these officials. It was a general answer to a general question. I'll admit in context that it may not have come across that way, but I have already explained it.

Coach's POV here is actually pretty straight forward. He isn't claiming he got cheated, he's just wondering about the enforcement of this particular rule. I think, in an AAU game, if I noticed it as the 6th player was getting to his bench and there hadn't been an advantage and it hadn't happened previously in the game, I'd let it go.

My point is that I don't think anyone here has really come at this without proper perspective.

For the record, #2 is not a T. It's a violation (9-3-3), and only for doing so for an "unauthorized reason." But you knew that. :)
I doubt anyone here would consider the "6th man" getting his a$$ off the court to be less than authorized.

Better now, Adam? ;)

Not really. :) For two reasons.
First, I don't see how the OP could be considered a deceptive situation. It's more of an "Oh Sh!t" moment.
Second, and more importantly, I'm not finding anything in rule 10 about "deceptively" leaving the playing court being a technical foul. ;)

You are missing the larger point. During AAU games there are often not the same structures or expectations. For example you might not even have players and the table in the proper place which makes any substitution an adventure because you cannot follow the same procedures you have in a real game. Whether the coach thinks he got screwed or not was also not the point I was making. And considering many games are not run under the same structure that a regular season, I would not suggest that the official did the wrong thing unless I knew more about the tournament. And I bet if the coach was had to answer, he probably would tell us about exceptions, upon exceptions of many rules in this and many tournaments. And usually how substitutions are done have many challenges to follow the proper rules with multiple courts next to each other and it being difficult to even have a clear bench area as the coach wants to suggest.

Peace

I don't disagree with anything you wrote, except, "You are missing the larger point."

I didn't suggest these officials did the wrong thing. I answered a general question with a general answer. The fact is some officials are reluctant to call this because they think it was their fault, not the coach's. I never said these particular officials were guilty of this; in fact, I specifically allowed for an alternate theory; that the level of ball contributed to their decision. I also stated that while I may or may not disagree with that, it's certainly not in the same category as the "spineless" variety of no-call.

Two of these are not Ts at all for what you have described. I will take it a step further as a couple of people have made it clear what is wrong with your statement. On #3 is also not illegal if one player or bench personnel has to leave the bench area. It is not illegal for one player to go to the locker room or go to another part of the court to deal with an issue like blood on the jersey to change or an injury. Having 6 on the court is the only thing that is going to warrant a T in this situation.

Easy, this is an AAU game. The purpose of these games is to have kids play the game of basketball, not follow all rules of the rulebook to the letter. And if you want to change that, then do not get upset when you get Ts for things like numbers on jersey being out of place or other uniform requirements, then I will worry about how many players are on the court and when to the letter.

Peace

My fault. #2 is now just a violation, but it's a whistle at least. And, I think JRut is pushing it to imply that the 6th player was "going to the locker room" or "dealing with a blood issue". He jumped off in front of my bench and ran back to his bench and sat down.

But, he is right in that I believe it wasn't called because it's an AAU game. I had higher expectations from these refs. And, in the rare times this has happened in my AAU games, the T has always been called.

I was just responding to Mark Dexter, who admits to seeing the 6th guy jumping off the court but calls nothing. If he does that in his varsity high school game, then I think his evaluator would disagree.

JRut: "get Ts for things like numbers on jersey being out of place or other uniform requirements, then I will worry about how many players are on the court and when to the letter".

Equating illegal jerseys with how many players are on the court? That's a good analogy. I think letting a team play with only 5 is pretty important. Let me know when you're reffing my game, so I know I can play 6 on 5.

Don't worry, coach. You are correct about this whole thing.
Mark is smarter than that. He doesn't really believe that all six kids must be counted simultaneously in order for there to be a penalty. It must have been $1 beer night at the campus wateringhole.
Rut likes to argue in circles.

Well was the game going on with 6 active players against 5 active players? The answer to that is obviously no there was not, so not sure what the big deal is. If there was an honest mistake, what is giving a T during what is an off-season league or tournament going to prove? All it is going to prove is the officials know the rules. You have not even said how there was an advantage to this situation or what affect this had on the game.

Peace

I am talking in circles and you not only agreed with me, it went against your basic point of view. Then again, you are the same person that tried to tell people how to have a discussion and you got upset over the application of a rule at a level you do not work.

Kinda reaching here, aren't you? Do you call T's in order to prove something?
Apparently you needed proof that these guys know the rules.


Do advantage/affect on the game ever play a part in whether you make this particular call?

I do not know how I am reaching. The coach asked why something was not called and I gave an answer.

Yes for me. And it is because often times other expected procedures would not apply that I stated in earlier in previous posts.

Peace

Just so I understand. You apply advantage/disadvantage to 10-6?
Could you give an example of when you would not call this T?

I did not say anything about advantage/disadvantage. And considering that you like to add things that people do not say, let us end this discussion right now.

Peace

Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref
Do advantage/affect on the game ever play a part in whether you make this particular call?

Hey Justa,
http://www.softwaremag.com/archive/2...ngItsTail.jpeg

You obviously do not know what the term advantage/disadvantage means. Advantage/disadvantage is about fouls and contact. It is not about some technical application of a rule that is not designed for that league.

Peace

So why did you bring it up?

Once again, this conversation is over your head; kind of like the previous discussion about "foul count" that you still do not understand to this day.

Peace

JRut - it was 6 active players against 5 active players. It was for about 8-10 seconds. Long enough for us to dribble from the backcourt to the frontcourt, have me yell to the refs three times that they have 6 on the court, have the other coach hear me and yell "Johnny, get off the court!", and have the guy jump off in front of my bench, run to his bench and sit down. The ball was in play the entire time until I received my technical.

As this is worded, I probably would have called this regardless of the level. Doesn't make me right and them wrong, just how I would have probably done it.

OK.

Peace

Been meaning to pick up an English/gibberish dictionary.

Funny, you were the only one not understanding. Maybe it is just you.

Peace

Maybe you could look up contradiction in the dictionary and explain this sequence.

It is obvious you do not understand a basic concept. The term "Advantage/disadvantage" involves contact and fouls.

Have you ever seen a technical "carry" by a dribbler standing at the division line, all by himself and the nearest defender is below the 3 point line not in any way trying to prevent the movement of the ball handler? Well in many people's eyes this is not a necessary proper call because it might be a technical violation of the rules, but no advantage was gained by the dribbler so the violation is passed on. As opposed if the same carry takes place to try to set up a move to the basket or to maintain control of the ball and the player carries the ball and an official might make that call instead. You can violate rules on a technical level and not put anyone at a disadvantage.

I guess to you that particular call is based on advantage/disadvantage. In the OP, I would make a case that there was no advantage by the team with 6 players on the court for such a brief period of time during a summer league game. Unlike a regular season game there is not the same dead ball structures in place and usually this takes place out of pure confusion because some of the same things that happen during the regular season are not in place. And I am sure that is why the officials on this game simply passed on a T.

Peace

As I said before - this one is only a T if it's discovered while being violated. If a kid runs off the floor, then you count five on the court, you didn't discover it while there were six on the court. No T.

Might be a violation, but leaving the floor for an unauthorized reason is no longer penalized with a technical foul.

First off, check your definitions. Other than during intermissions and timeouts, players should generally be off the bench. Second, even if he were a substitute, the T is for leaving a bench area during a fight. Otherwise, we'd have a T whenever the JV players left to dress for the varsity game.

All I have is a "sorry, coach, we didn't see him when he was out on the court."

Now we're talking differently. If they knew six were out on the court, but chose not to call it, you have a semi-legitimate beef. If they truly didn't even think to count until A6 ran off (which is what I assumed in my answers above), then there's nothing they can do. If a T is called, A's coach is going to have the right to go ballistic for ignoring the rules.

First off, thanks for bumping me up a level or two. I'll hopefully be there in a few years.

That said, I would hope that my evaluator would rather have me follow the rule than make what seems to be the right call.

Also, I'm not saying that I would ignore 6 players on the court. I have (and will continue to) called this a T, whether it's a situation where I should have counted or not. If, however, A6 steps off the court right next to me and only then do I notice that there are still 5 players out there, I'm not calling a T unless A6 comes back onto the court.

Speak for yourself, my Georgetown friend.

Ok, I'd blow the whistle and charge a team technical foul. ;)

Seriously, Mark, it doesn't matter if the exiting player is the first one that you count or that last one, the reasonable call here is a T. The line that you are attempting to draw is just too fine.

One Plus Five Equals Six, Do The Math ...
 

Well put. I agree. If you see the player leave the court, that means the player was seen while on, or partially on, the court, if there are five teammates still on the court, do the math, five plus the one who exited is six. Technical foul. In my opinion, just because the whistle was blown while there were only five players on the court, I don't think that it's too late to call the foul, as long as the official was 100% sure that the team was playing with six immediately before the whistle. As in almost all calls, there is going to be some type of delay between the foul, or violation, and the resultant whistle. Just because, at the same time that you're thinking about putting some air into the whistle, there are only five players still left within the boundaries of the playing court, is not, in my opinion, a reason to ignore this technical foul.

Folks, that's not what I've been advocating.

If I know that there are six on the court, then someone steps off, I'll call the T. No different than calling a travel a half-second late because the whistle fell out of my mouth.

If, however, I see a player come off the court, then I count, there's no way I can justify a T and I'm certainly not calling one.

Would you call a violation for leaving the court for an unauthorized reason?

Whatintheheck is the difference?:confused:

In both cases, you just discovered that a team had 6 players participating simultaneously. That meets the rules requirements.

See case book play 10.1.6(a). In that situation, the technical foul is called <b>after</b> the clock has stopped and <b>no one</b> is participating. That shoots your theory down.

I'm calling it.

10.1.6
 

10.1.6 Situation: With Team A leading 51 to 50, a held ball is called. A6 properly reports and enters the game. Time is then called by Team A. The clock shows two seconds remaining in the game. After play is resumed by a throw-in, the officials: (a) recognize that A has six players competing, but cannot get the clock stopped; or (b) do not notice Team A has six players on the court. Following the throw-in, time expires. Team B now reports to the officials that Team A had six players on the court.
Ruling: In (a), since one of the officials had knowledge that Team A had six players participating simultaneously and this was detected prior to time expiring, a technical foul is assessed against Team A. In (b), since it was not recognized by either official, but was called to their attention after time had expired, it is too late to assess any penalty.

Not at all - because the officials knew, while time was still on the clock, but there's a problem with reporting.

My situation is closer to 10.1.6(b) - if no one notices until the game is over, the game is over.

Maybe. HTBT on that one.

That said, it's not getting you two shots in addition to possession.

In your case, you <b>did</b> notice it. You were confirming what you noticed.

You're going completely against the language of 10-1-6 imo, Mark. You discovered it while being violated and the penalty should apply.

The language we should be most concerned with is "while being violated", imo.While being violated, in my mind, means that there are 6 players on the court. If one comes off, then there are 5, which is the legal case.

If the Fed wanted to include the cases where the official is positive that 6 were on the court, but didn't actually see 6 players on the court, then they have to clear up the wording.

The M-W definition of while is:My belief is that said period of time ends when all excess players have left the playing court. The excess players leaving the playing court is the occurance mark that the definition speaks of.

This is exactly why officials need to pay attention to their surroundings!

Let's assume that the game is being videotaped.

My partner(s) and I allow the inbounds pass without having counted five for each side. (Mea culpa, but not much we can do now.) I just assume that there are 5 players for A and 5 for B, and don't think to count either side.

Now, A6 steps off the floor. This is my first indication that something may be amiss. At that moment, pause the playback and count how many players A has on the court. (Hint - the answer is five.)

When there were actually six A players on the court, I had no idea that there were six out there. Unless someone shows me that the rule has changed, or shows that Team A has done something wrong by having 5 on the court, I'm not calling a T. That may be splitting hairs a bit too closely for some of you, but that's what my decision is going to be.

Hear, hear!

I couldn't agree more.

If the game is vodeotaped, then you wlll be joining Juggling Referee in doing middle school games for the rest of your careers.:D

The tape doesn't lie. A team played with 6 players. You were aware of that as soon as a player jumped off the court and you counted the remaining players on the court. If you failed to either immediately count the players left on the court <b>OR</b> you failed to call a violation on that player for leaving the court, then you have a whole bunch of 'splaining to do. Again, that's because the tape doesn't lie.

Using your rationale, you either failed to follow the language of the rule by not penalizing the team for having 6 players on the court when you discovered it, or if you say that you didn't discover it, you then failed to call an obvious violation for a player leaving the floor for an unauthorized reason. Pick your poison when the tape gets reviewed.

And, as I said, I'd be willing to call the violation for leaving the floor. I feel like this topic may be reaching the "well done" stage.

Except that if it's the defense, then calling this violation is pointless and potentially harmful to the offense.

Sorry - in all the perturbations, I've been using team A and assuming that the team in violation is on offense. If the defense did this (i.e., the original situation), I'd have no whistle, obviously.

You'd watch a player step off the floor and go sit on the bench......with no whistle for anything?

As I said, good luck explaining that one from the tape.:)

Yup, well done stage.