ejection for asst coach - how many free throws?

[Coach Bill]

NFHS rules:

The assistant coach is mouthing off and earns a technical foul. Keeps mouthing off, and earns an ejection. Do you shoot 2 free throws or 4?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

NFHS rules:

The assistant coach is mouthing off and earns a technical foul. Keeps mouthing off, and earns an ejection. Do you shoot 2 free throws or 4?

Depends. It sounds like they doubled him up with the Ts, in which case you shoot 4.

If, however, the official ruled it a single flagrant T, you only shoot 2. I could see going that route if it happened close enough together; although I'm more inclined to lean towards 2 Ts here. I'd have to be there, though.

Bottom line, find out how many indirect Ts they hit the head coach with, and you have your answer.

[Coach Bill]

The T's were about 5 seconds apart.

Assistant Coach: "That's a foul!"
Ref: "Technical foul, assistant coach".
Assistant Coach: "Come on, are you serious? blah, blah, blah..."
Ref: "Technical foul, you're outta here."

Two separate T mechanics, so I think you're inclination is correct. We only shot two in our game, so I was wondering.

Is it possible he considered it one act, and went with one technical and simply asked him to leave? It was an AAU game, so I'm assuming there can be some leeway here.

[lukealex]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

The T's were about 5 seconds apart.

Assistant Coach: "That's a foul!"
Ref: "Technical foul, assistant coach".
Assistant Coach: "Come on, are you serious? blah, blah, blah..."
Ref: "Technical foul, you're outta here."

Two separate T mechanics, so I think you're inclination is correct. We only shot two in our game, so I was wondering.

Is it possible he considered it one act, and went with one technical and simply asked him to leave? It was an AAU game, so I'm assuming there can be some leeway here.

It sounds like 2 T's to me. Should have been 4 free throws.

[Adam]

The fact that it was AAU does matter. The official probably did the more expedient and less punative thing. That said, I'd have gone with 4 shots, HC would have had 2 indirects even in (especially in) AAU.

The official may have simply decided to change the original T to a flagrant. Unless this particular AAU league has a rule alteration stating 1 shot per T.

[Bad Zebra]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

...That said, I'd have gone with 4 shots, HC would have had 2 indirects even in (especially in) AAU....

I'm inclined to agree with this line of thought. The AAU games I've worked, seems like potential ejection is the only way to get anyone's attention. Now that the HC has 2 indirect, he MIGHT be more inclined to behave.

[JoeTheRef]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

The T's were about 5 seconds apart.

Assistant Coach: "That's a foul!"
Ref: "Technical foul, assistant coach".
Assistant Coach: "Come on, are you serious? blah, blah, blah..."
Ref: "Technical foul, you're outta here."

Two separate T mechanics, so I think you're inclination is correct. We only shot two in our game, so I was wondering.

Is it possible he considered it one act, and went with one technical and simply asked him to leave? It was an AAU game, so I'm assuming there can be some leeway here.

Assistant Coach: "That's a foul!"
Ref (ME): Coach, control your bench before I do.

Outcome: 1 of 2 things..YOu don't hear assistant coach again, or you do, then it's a deserving T. Just MY opinion.

I know its probably not the popular belief on this forum, but again in my opinion, in that scenario, that was a quick and unnecessary T at any level.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JoeTheRef

Assistant Coach: "That's a foul!"
Ref (ME): Coach, control your bench before I do.

Outcome: 1 of 2 things..YOu don't hear assistant coach again, or you do, then it's a deserving T. Just MY opinion.

I know its probably not the popular belief on this forum, but again in my opinion, in that scenario, that was a quick and unnecessary T at any level.

It may or may not have been. What we don't know is what happened before, because it wasn't germane to the question posed in the OP. IOW, I don't think we can make this judgment.

There have been times when I've made this call immediately, and times when I've given the HC a chance to address the problem without free throws.

Here, he may have previously given the warning.

Or the AC may have stood up and yelled it (I'm not warning for this) across the floor.

Or it may have been a quick T.

We just don't know.

[Oz Referee]

I had a funny sitch a few years ago.

About 90 seconds to go in a tied game, probably the equivalent of a High School game in the US.

Assitant Coach is complaining non-stop after a charge is called on the team's star player (who happens to be his son) resulting in said player fouling out. So I T up the Asst Coach. Asst Coach continues whining and doesn't get the hint, so I toss him - without calling another T. He then complains that I can't eject him as he only has one technical foul so.........he gets his second.

Opposing team shoots 4 free throws plus gets the ball back, they hit 3/4 and score a 2-pointer on the next play. They end up winning the game by 3.

After the game the Head Coach walks towards me. I think "oh god, here we go". He sticks his hand out to shake mine and says "thank you so much for doing that, I've been trying to get rid of that a$$ for years, but since his kid is out best player the association always gives him the Assistant Coach job"

All round was a bizarre experience.

[RCBSports]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

I'm inclined to agree with this line of thought. The AAU games I've worked, seems like potential ejection is the only way to get anyone's attention. Now that the HC has 2 indirect, he MIGHT be more inclined to behave.

Might is the key word. I have coaches still after having them thrown out come back and still continue the nonsense. But yea, to me, it sounds like 2 'T' and the HC is benched.

I dunno though; really have to be there to make the call, but a tip is just to go with your first instinct.

-Lucas

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by RCBSports

I have coaches still after having them thrown out come back...

We now have a law against that here in Oregon.

[Stat-Man]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Depends. It sounds like they doubled him up with the Ts, in which case you shoot 4.

If, however, the official ruled it a single flagrant T, you only shoot 2. I could see going that route if it happened close enough together; although I'm more inclined to lean towards 2 Ts here. I'd have to be there, though.

Bottom line, find out how many indirect Ts they hit the head coach with, and you have your answer.

I was part of a situation two years ago where nobody knew how many Ts were called.

The visiting HC had a direct earlier in the game. With less than seconds to go, his team throws the ball OOB and he is unhappy about what he thinks is too much time running off the clock. He gets another T and yet one more because he won't stop arguing. He's eventually escorted off the court to prevent a forfeit with a handful of seconds left.

The table is under the impression we have 4 FT to shoot since two T's were called. A1 makes the first shot and misses the second and all of a sudden we have players scrambling for the rebound and fans wondering why the clock isn't running (and we're wondering what happened to the other two free throws we anticipated) Finally, the timer starts the clock and lets it expire. Needless to say, we had a lot of angry people from the opposition post-game -- partly because we beat them while they were ranked and partly because they disliked what transpired in the final minute.

I thought for sure we'd have a riot and I couldn't wait to get out and head home that night.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Stat-Man

The table is under the impression we have 4 FT to shoot since two T's were called. A1 makes the first shot and misses the second and all of a sudden we have players scrambling for the rebound and fans wondering why the clock isn't running (and we're wondering what happened to the other two free throws we anticipated)

Why were players allowed to line up along the lanes in the first place?

Sounds like you had officials who weren't really officials.

[Stat-Man]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Why were players allowed to line up along the lanes in the first place? Sounds like you had officials who weren't really officials.

Since this was roughly 4 years ago, I'm not 100% sure of all the details, but I think there was personal foul called before the visiting HC picked up direct T's #2 and #3. I think the sequence of events was the personal foul, the visiting HC jawing during as the teams were lining up, and then the two direct T's. (A shame my play by play data was lost in a CD failure )

If the NCAA POI rule was in effect 4 years ago, we would shoot the technical shots and then the personal foul shots. The table crew was expecting six shots. (2 for each T + 2 for the original personal). We shot two (presumably with the lane empty) and then two more with the lane filled. It wasn't until there was playing action on the missed rebound that the confusion kicked in with the table thinking we had two more free throws. The timer/table was frozen wondering what was happening, while players were going for the ball wondering why the clock was running down to zero.

Communication would have definitely helped here.