The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Is leaving the bench a T? (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/51210-leaving-bench-t.html)

bigda65 Mon Jan 26, 2009 01:49pm
Is leaving the bench a T?
 
Is leaving a bench a T or just an ejection?

At a recent HS girls Varsity game, all visiting players and coaches left the bench, during a fight.

When the smoke cleared, it was a four on four contest with no subs for either team, and one brutal fan arrest.

Adam Mon Jan 26, 2009 01:52pm
Leaving the bench during a fight is a flagrant T, which means ejection.
Why were the coaches not ejected?

mbyron Mon Jan 26, 2009 01:54pm
Sounds like a forfeit to me (or perhaps a suspended game, and let the state clean up the mess).

buckrog64 Mon Jan 26, 2009 01:56pm
According to the foul summary on page 71 of the 08-09 rulebook, leaving the bench during a fight results in disqualification. Sounds like it is considered flagrant. Where's the video of this?

bigda65 Mon Jan 26, 2009 01:57pm
Good question snaq, one I can't answer.

There were no T's that I saw, only ejections, and no free throws for either team.

bigda65 Mon Jan 26, 2009 02:00pm
The video was sent to the conference to review, no word on the outcome that I know of. The home team coach has been quoted as saying that the video shows only 3 or 4 of his players left the bench and went onto the floor.

The scrum happened right in front of home bench.

Adam Mon Jan 26, 2009 02:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigda65 (Post 572522)
Good question snaq, one I can't answer.

There were no T's that I saw, only ejections, and no free throws for either team.
The ejections would have been reported as flagrant Ts. Free throws often cancel out during fights; it depends on how many left the bench for each team and how many on-court players fought. If each category (bench and on-court) was equal for each team, there would be no free throws.

Raymond Mon Jan 26, 2009 03:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 572517)
Leaving the bench during a fight is a flagrant T, which means ejection.
Why were the coaches not ejected?
Leaving the bench and not participating is not an ejection for the HC. It's one indirect no matter how many players left the bench.

The HC gets an indirect for each bench player who particiapates in a fight.

Nevadaref Mon Jan 26, 2009 03:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 572585)
Leaving the bench and not participating is not an ejection for the HC. It's one indirect no matter how many players left the bench.

The HC gets an indirect for each bench player who particiapates in a fight.
That might be your state association ruling, but it is NOT the NFHS rule. See 10-4-5. The HC is only allowed to enter the court if beckoned by an official.

Adam Mon Jan 26, 2009 03:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 572585)
Leaving the bench and not participating is not an ejection for the HC. It's one indirect no matter how many players left the bench.

The HC gets an indirect for each bench player who particiapates in a fight.
Coaches left the bench during the fight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigda65 (Post 572510)
Is leaving a bench a T or just an ejection?

At a recent HS girls Varsity game, all visiting players and coaches left the bench, during a fight.
When the smoke cleared, it was a four on four contest with no subs for either team, and one brutal fan arrest.

bigda65 Mon Jan 26, 2009 03:30pm
Snaq,

There was noone sitting for the visitors, they all were on the floor, HC, AC, watergirl, mascot.

Just kidding on the watergirl and the mascot, but noone was in the bench area all were on the other end of the court.

deecee Mon Jan 26, 2009 03:35pm
that sounds like a forfeit by the team -- also I would not asses a T on the coach -- if a fight breaks out the coach is beckoned whether I go through the dog and pony show of waving him on the court or not. If he is participating in the fight then thats different.

AKOFL Mon Jan 26, 2009 03:35pm
So are you giong to toss the coach if he is instumental in breaking up the fight even though you did not call him out on to the floor. If they are helping I would be inclined to say he was as good as beckoned, and thanks for the help. Is this a sit. you could or should show some gray area with?

deecee Mon Jan 26, 2009 03:36pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AKOFL (Post 572598)
So are you giong to toss the coach if he is instumental in breaking up the fight even though you did not call him out on to the floor. If they are helping I would be inclined to say he was as good as signaled, and thanks for the help. Is this a sit. you could or should show some gray area with?
The coach would get tossed if he accumulates enough indirect T's AKOFL, not because its a direct flagrant on him.

AKOFL Mon Jan 26, 2009 03:38pm
that was my thought. We are not going to penalize him personaly, even though we could for leaving the bench. The indirects would be his demise.:eek:

Raymond Mon Jan 26, 2009 03:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by deecee (Post 572599)
The coach would get tossed if he accumulates enough indirect T's AKOFL, not because its a direct flagrant on him.
Assuming coach is "beckoned" then he is only accumulating multiple indirect T's if bench personnel participated in the fight

Nevadaref Mon Jan 26, 2009 03:54pm
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.

deecee Mon Jan 26, 2009 04:01pm
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.

AKOFL Mon Jan 26, 2009 04:02pm
If the whole team is involved in the fight, who is left to play? Game over. Can you tell I'm bored?

mbyron Mon Jan 26, 2009 06:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 572613)
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.
How about 3-1-1? ;)

Nevadaref Mon Jan 26, 2009 06:33pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron (Post 572680)
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:

Adam Mon Jan 26, 2009 08:00pm
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.

shishstripes Mon Jan 26, 2009 08:15pm
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.

AKOFL Mon Jan 26, 2009 08:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by shishstripes (Post 572700)
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.

Adam Tue Jan 27, 2009 07:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by shishstripes (Post 572700)
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.
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.

mbyron Tue Jan 27, 2009 08:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 572682)
I fail to see your point. :confused:

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

Adam Tue Jan 27, 2009 08:07am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron (Post 572794)
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.

bigda65 Tue Jan 27, 2009 08:20am
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.

Adam Tue Jan 27, 2009 08:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigda65 (Post 572801)
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?

bob jenkins Tue Jan 27, 2009 08:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigda65 (Post 572801)
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.
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. ;)

Adam Tue Jan 27, 2009 08:58am
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 572811)
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. ;)
And since no free throws were shot, it stands to reason that each team had the same number of bench players. If not, whichever team had the least should have had two free throws.

Nevadaref Wed Jan 28, 2009 07:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron (Post 572794)
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.
I focused on the coaches because the OP clearly stated that each team had four players remaining following the altercation. Therefore, I knew that 3-1-1 was not an issue and that the only reason UNDER NFHS RULES that someone could suggest a forfeit was the coach situation. Perhaps it is different in your state, but the NFHS rules do NOT require that a team have an adult coach on the bench to play.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigda65 (Post 572510)
When the smoke cleared, it was a four on four contest with no subs for either team, and one brutal fan arrest.
BTW under the state regulations in NV a team forfeits if three or more individuals come off the bench during an altercation and it doesn't matter what role those people have with the team. If both teams have three or more leave the bench, then the game is a double-forfeit.

AKOFL Wed Jan 28, 2009 01:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 573159)
I focused on the coaches because the OP clearly stated that each team had four players remaining following the altercation. Therefore, I knew that 3-1-1 was not an issue and that the only reason UNDER NFHS RULES that someone could suggest a forfeit was the coach situation. Perhaps it is different in your state, but the NFHS rules do NOT require that a team have an adult coach on the bench to play.



BTW under the state regulations in NV a team forfeits if three or more individuals come off the bench during an altercation and it doesn't matter what role those people have with the team. If both teams have three or more leave the bench, then the game is a double-forfeit.
I like that. A rule with some teeth.:cool:


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:24pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1