Leaving the court--Tech Foul?

[Mark Padgett]

This is a good no call. Imagine if you would have called something and then were told the item she went up to get was a personal hygiene device.

[Skarecrow]

Thanks everyone......

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Imagine if you would have called something and then were told the item she went up to get was a personal hygiene device.

You mean like lip balm.

[Nevadaref]

First, welcome to the forum.
Second, if you are willing to take some criticism, you will learn a lot.
Third, I will now correct all of the inaccurate statements in your first post. Basically, the stuff that you think that you know, but you really don't know.

Originally Posted by derwil

Once the players leave the confines of the court, they are considered bench personnel.

Not true. Players become bench personnel when they are replaced by a substitute, during an intermission between quarters, or when the Head Coach is notified of their disqualification.
Here's an old play ruling from the NFHS which demonstrates why what you have written above is incorrect:
1999-2000 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations
SITUATION 6: Player A4 leaves the playing floor before her substitute has an opportunity to report to the scorer’s table. During which time, player A4 disrespectfully addresses the nearest official.
RULING: The official assesses a technical foul on player A4. There is no indirect technical foul charged to the head coach because A4 has not been replaced and is not considered bench personnel. (3-3-3, 4-34-1, 2, 3)

Originally Posted by derwil

So far as I know, there are no restrictions on bench personnel movement other that standing up while play is on the court.

Now you know differently.

2005-06 POINTS OF EMPHASIS
1. Sporting Behavior. The NFHS Basketball Rules Committee continues to be concerned with player, coach and fan behavior. While administrators continue to focus on solutions, it is imperative that all parties involved accept responsibility and improve behavior. Specifically, the committee wants the following addressed:
...
B. Time-outs: When a team goes on a scoring run, emotions often run high. Nationwide, there is an apparent increase in bench personnel running out onto the court after a time-out is whistled. Typically, the bench personnel of the team that has gained momentum run out onto the court to celebrate and congratulate their teammates. The other team's players, heading toward their bench area, often cross with the celebrating team. This situation often leads to bumping, pushing and/or taunting.
Coaches must make sure that bench personnel remain in the team bench area (1-13-3) after a time-out is called. Officials must be aware of the potential for confrontation, use preventive officiating techniques and penalize appropriately.

2004-05 POINTS OF EMPHASIS
3.
A. ...The committee is also concerned about bench personnel leaving the bench, sometimes during a live ball. Heading into the hallway to get a drink or sitting up in the stands with friends or family, even for a short period of time, are not authorized reasons unless they are medically related. Coaches must ensure that bench personnel remain on the bench.

Originally Posted by derwil

I would probably ask the coach to let her know the correct substitution procedures and to exit the court towards the bench so that there is not a "delay of game" warning posted to her team.

1. There is no requirement for a player to exit the court in any particular direction. You can check the rules book, but you simply won't find anything.

2. There are ONLY four specific reasons that a delay of game warning can be issued to a team. Unless one of these four actions has occurred an official cannot charge one to a team.

RULE 4, SECTION 47 WARNING FOR DELAY

A warning to a team for delay is an administrative procedure by an official
which is recorded in the scorebook by the scorer and reported to the coach:

ART. 1 . . .

For throw-in plane violations, as in 9-2-10, 10-1-5c.

ART. 2 . . .

For huddle by either team and contact with the free thrower, as in
10-1-5d.

ART. 3 . . .

For interfering with the ball following a goal as in 10-1-5e.

ART. 4 . . .

For failure to have the court ready for play following any time-out
as in 10-1-5f.

As you can see the action described above is not one of these four, so it would be incorrect to issue a warning for delay in this case.

Originally Posted by derwil

A "T" is unwarrented as this was not a disruption to the game by bench personnel.

1. Spelling counts on this forum.
2. That is your opinion, but another official may believe differently and, as already detailed above, there certainly is rules support for charging a technical foul here.

Originally Posted by derwil

Just my opinion

As a new member here, you may find that the difference between your opinions and the actual rules can be pretty amazing.

If you are willing to stick around, take some heat for your comments, and open your mind to learning new things, then the folks here will increase your rules knowledge and make you a better official.

Best wishes.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

If you are willing to stick around, take some heat for your comments, and open your mind to learning new things, then the folks here will increase your rules knowledge and make you a better official.

Best wishes.

That's what worked for me.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

First, welcome to the forum. Second, if you are willing to take some criticism, you will learn a lot. Basically, the stuff that you think that you know, but you really don't know. As a new member here, you may find that the difference between your opinions and the actual rules can be pretty amazing. If you are willing to stick around, take some heat for your comments, and open your mind to learning new things, then the folks here will increase your rules knowledge and make you a better official. Best wishes.

Great post, maybe the post of the month. What makes it so good are the relevant citations, not just numbers, but the whole citation for those coaches, and fanboys, who may not have a rulebook, or a casebook. I, a twenty-eight year veteran, had to be reminded of some of those old citations. I'm glad that you were not one of the Forum members to be driven away, but to stick around, while I was going through my mad image posting stage.

Speaking of citations. Two of my three free sources of citations has disappeared form the internet, the NFHS rules, and the NFHS caseplays, from the EOfficials website. The only free citations that I can find are the NFHS rules only on the Middle Tennessee Basketball Officials Association website, and portions of the longer rules, like Rule 4 Definitions, aren't included. Are there any other free websites available, and if not, what is the cheapest way to get access to NFHS rules, and caseplays, online? NFHS? EOfficials? Someplace else? I'm so cheap that I squeeze a nickel so tightly that the buffalo has a bowel movement.

Great segue from the buffalo on the tail side of the nickel, to the proud Native American on the other side, to Happy Thanksgiving.

[mutantducky]

In a game I saw last year where a T was given. A player is substituted after an inbound. Goes off and on then off and is off when the play is resumed. Coach didn't mean for him to be subbed. But he is standing to the side(table) of the coach right near the sideline. I know the player must be at the bench or at the table but in this case it could have been confusing to the defense whether or not the player was in. He just stood there for about five seconds or so and then the T was given. Would that be a delay of game warning or a T?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by mutantducky

In a game I saw last year where a T was given. A player is substituted after an inbound. Goes off and on then off and is off when the play is resumed. Coach didn't mean for him to be subbed. But he is standing to the side(table) of the coach right near the sideline. I know the player must be at the bench or at the table but in this case it could have been confusing to the defense whether or not the player was in. He just stood there for about five seconds or so and then the T was given. Would that be a delay of game warning or a T?

There is no delay of game warning for a bench player being up off the bench. It's a T; sometimes we'll warn the coach, but it's not official and it's not required.

The question is, had this player been subbed for, meaning there were 5 other players on the court at the time? If so, he's bench personnel and must be in the bench area during play. Standing on a sideline someplace else is defenitely T worthy.

If he was one of the 5, there is a T for delaying a return to the playing court after being out of bounds for a legitimate reason.

I'm not sure from this post which situation this was.

[mutantducky]

thanks for the replies- and from the original posts I learned it wasn't a delay of game. In mine there were five other players and the player who just subbed out continued to stand on the sideline between the table and where the coach was. So I guess a delay isn't called for there and a T is ok but not on the specific player.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by mutantducky

A player is substituted after an inbound. Goes off and on then off and is off when the play is resumed.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

If he was one of the 5, there is a T for delaying a return to the playing court after being out of bounds for a legitimate reason.

Now why doesn't that sound right to me?

10.3.2 SITUATION B:

After a lengthy substitution process involving multiple substitutions for both Team A and Team B, A5 goes to the bench and remains there, mistakenly believing he/she has been replaced. The ball is put in play even though Team A has only four players on the court. Team A is bringing the ball into A’s frontcourt when the coach of Team A realizes they have only four players. The coach yells for A5 to return and he/she sprints directly onto the court and catches up with the play. RULING: No technical foul is charged to A5. A5’s return to the court was not deceitful, nor did it provide A5 an unfair positioning advantage on the court.

Thanks for letting me show the new guy that we pick on you too, Snaqs.

PS If this player had been the thrower on the inbounds play, then Snaqs would be correct, but I don't believe that was the case in the situation described by mutantducky.

[RCBSports]

It's called game management. Now unless she causing disruption or didn't return, I wouldn't call it. No need to start a riot and cause the coaching staff to get all fired up for something that is minor. That's a good no call!

-Lucas