Assuming coach is "beckoned" then he is only accumulating multiple indirect T's if bench personnel participated in the fight

I don't know why people are talking about suspending play or forfeiting the game. There is no NFHS rule that would require such, even if all of the coaches were disqualified.

If your state has a such a provision that is different, so please note it when making that kind of comment.

California requires a coach to be present and if all coaches are ejected the team forfeits (at least it was the case 3 years ago).

This sounds like a forfeit because the whole bench was on the court -- so therefore all of them are done, and depending on how many of the players on teh court were involved, and I am assuming AT LEAST 1, you could potentially have a forfeit if the team is down to lets say 1 legal player, and they do not have a chance to win the game.

If the whole team is involved in the fight, who is left to play? Game over. Can you tell I'm bored?

How about 3-1-1? ;)

I fail to see your point. :confused:

Are you misreading my post? Are you substituting "players" where I wrote "coaches"? :eek:

Nevada is right. The NFHS rules do not require a forfeit when all the coaches get DQd. I'm willing to bet most states do, however, have that provision in their rules.

But we haven't been told the V bench players participated, all we have heard is that the players on the bench have left the bench area. Only one indirect T on the coach for all offenders, who are assessed flagrant T's. Now if you only had one individual on the V team participating and they were a player on the floor, you would still have the remaining four players left. Not sure why some people believe this would automatically be a forfeit but a regrettable situation none-the-less.

Very good shishhopper. You have attained true enlightenment.

We're not assuming forfeit. My first question is why were the coaches not DQd. There's a legitimate answer to that, but the OP doesn't know. Coaches get more leeway on these things than players, IMO.

I'm assuming the coaches were not DQd because the game was not ended; most (all?) states require an adult coach on the bench in order for a team to participate.

I'm not misreading anything. The OP reported that everyone left the bench, and seemed to suggest that the entire team participated in the fight. I believe that my post was the first to suggest a forfeit or suspension.

You began with: "I don't know why people are talking about suspending play or forfeiting the game." My answer: 3-1-1. If there are no players left, that rule applies.

Your posts have focused on coach ejections, but as I read the case there were more ejections than that.

Since he said four players were left for each team, I assume at least 4 did not participate.

Snaq,

You are correct. The two players involved in the fight were ej'd, and all bench personel (both teams)(except coaches) were ej'd.

I dont think any other players were actually fighting, just trying to break up the original fisticuff.

What were the coaches doing? Breaking it up or mixing it up?

Then the OP / ruling seems consistent. The bench personnel were ejected, it's one indirect on each coach (assuming the coaches did not participate and were considered "beckoned"), the two players were ejected. That leaves 4 players and a (seat-belted) coach for each team. And, each team is probably in the double bonus by now. ;)