Was this handled correctly?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

1. Flagrant personal on the initial foul, two shots for BV.

I agree.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

2. If the coaches didn't participate, they don't get fouls, IMO. I give them leeway. But if you give them techs for leaving the bench, they need to be flagrant and the coaches need to be ejected. In this case, you'll have two free throws for each coach that left the bench. Two for BV and four for Rio. But the two BV FTs are cancelld by two of Rio's. So, two for Rio and none for BV here.

You are mistaken here because you are including the assistant coach. This incorrectly yields two extra free throws. In a fight situation you only consider the head coaches as a separate category, which would be classified as simultaneous technicals and the FTs would cancel. The assistants are bench personnel and are covered by Penalty 8b. Therefore, the assistant coach leaving the bench gets lumped in with the team members who did the same.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

3. Each player team member that comes off the bench gets a flagrant T. Since none of them participated, you only shoot two free throws for the team that had the fewest players come off the bench. Each head coach gets 1 indirect (not relevant if they're ejected, too.) Rio gets two more FTs here.

I know what you mean, but let's use specific language, especially in this situation. The players are those five for each team who were on the court. Team members are bench personnel. We must be precise here due to the different penalty categories.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

4. Final tally, assuming coaches didn't participate:
BV gets 2 FTs. Rio gets 4 FTs and the ball at the division line.
Head coach from each team gets one indirect T.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

5. Final tally assuming coaches did participate:
BV gets 2 FTs, Rio gets 6 FTs. Every coach that came out gets a direct, if they were assistants, the coach gets an indirect for each. In the case of the BV coach, if both coaches that participated were assistants, then the HC would get 3 indirects and also be ejected. Rio still gets the ball.

It doesn't matter whether the head coaches get penalized or not (other than their own ejections) as their offenses would offset. Therefore, my final tally is the same either way.
BV shoots 2 FTs for the flagrant personal foul, and then Rio shoots two for all of the members of bench personnel from BV who left the bench. Rio then gets the ball at the division line.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

But it seems to be common for refs to mess up the free throws on these situations.

I guess that applies to you too!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

It doesn't matter whether the head coaches get penalized or not (other than their own ejections) as their offenses would offset. Therefore, my final tally is the same either way.
BV shoots 2 FTs for the flagrant personal foul, and then Rio shoots two for all of the members of bench personnel from BV who left the bench. Rio then gets the ball at the division line.

I think it does matter, because I'm not penalizing the assistants unless they participate. If the two coaches from BV and one coach from Rio all participate enough to earn the flagrant T, then there will be an extra two free throws for Rio.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I guess that applies to you too!

You're right, I confused myself when I wrote all this down by trying to figure out whether or not I'd eject the coaches.

2 and 2 without coach Ts, Rio ball.
With coach Ts (due to my assumption that they participated if they got Ts), it's 2 for BV and 4 for Rio, Rio ball.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I think it does matter, because I'm not penalizing the assistants unless they participate.

I'm not talking about what you would or wouldn't do. I'm talking about what the NFHS rules say to do. If they leave the bench, then the NFHS says that they get penalized. Your state may have a provision to do it differently, I know that mine does, but that doesn't change what the is the proper penalty according to the NFHS rules book.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

If the two coaches from BV and one coach from Rio all participate enough to earn the flagrant T, then there will be an extra two free throws for Rio.

That is correct, but the penalty for those who participate is 2 FTs for each offender.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I'm not talking about what you would or wouldn't do. I'm talking about what the NFHS rules say to do. If they leave the bench, then the NFHS says that they get penalized. Your state may have a provision to do it differently, I know that mine does, but that doesn't change what the is the proper penalty according to the NFHS rules book.

Fair enough.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

That is correct, but the penalty for those who participate is 2 FTs for each offender.

Do they not cancel out like double Ts?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Do they not cancel out like double Ts?

We've debated that point on here in the past. The NFHS isn't clear about it.

Most of us think fighters can cancel with fighters even though some of them were players and some were bench personnel.

Fighting is one of the situations that I've asked the NFHS committee to clarify for next season.

For example: 3 players from Team A fight with 2 players from Team B. 2 members of Team A come off the bench and fight while 4 members of Team B come off the bench and fight. In addition, 3 other individuals of Team A bench personnel leave the bench (two team members and an asst coach) and 1 other team member of Team A comes onto the floor just to observe.
How does it shake out?

PS
For a situation in which both HCs leave the bench and the asst coach for one of the teams does as well, and all three of these individuals participate in the fight, then the penalties for the HCs would offset.

[mbyron]

I would simply like to add that I agree with Snaq about giving coaches leeway on whether they have "left the bench area." The limit of the leeway is the determination of how far they come and whether they are helping or hindering me.

[Bad Zebra]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I think that is a good example of how to correctly use the ejection signal:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWMvunX3zGk

MTD, Sr.

I like JB Caldwells little gesture about 16 seconds in:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78r7lp3pEuE

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I would simply like to add that I agree with Snaq about giving coaches leeway on whether they have "left the bench area." The limit of the leeway is the determination of how far they come and whether they are helping or hindering me.

Even though I have been fortunate enough to avoid a full-blown fight situation thus far in my career, my varsity crew has agreed that as soon as a problem like this occurs, we will IMMEDIATELY BECKON both head coaches onto the floor as they stand the best chance of helping us restore order.

Several years ago, my current crew did have a full-blown fight situation that got ugly. Since they did not beckon the head coaches onto the floor, the head coaches remained on the sidelines while the perpetrators continued. Apparently, the officials were reluctant to break up the fight from a liability standpoint. Therefore, the fight continued for a period of time.

I certainly hope that we never encounter the situation.

[Jack]

Gentlemen - upon further review and discussion we have determined that the initial foul was not deemed a flagrant. I went down this way:

Rio players shot is blocked and recovered by BV player, Rio player immediatly fouls and ref blows whistle. After that whistle is blown the Rio player wrestled the BV player to the ground and continues to acost the BV player physically. The players are separated and the rest of the description stands.

In light of this clarification is it possible that the referee got the BV award of 8 free throws correct. 2 for the personal- 2 each for back to back technicals while he blows the whistle and the RIO player continues to fight and two for the coach coming on to the floor.

Or possibly six due to the coaches offset as has been suggested.

[Adam]

I'm only commenting here on the initial fighting action by the Rio player. At most, I'll give the personal foul and one flagrant Technical foul afterwards; unless there is a significant gap in time between the first blow and the second blow. To me, it's all one act. So, four shots seems appropriate.

That said, I don't think there's anything in the rule that prevents the official from calling multiple flagrants against the same player in this situation.

Rio still gets only 2 free throws out of it, and they will get the ball since the BV T was last.

[Texas Aggie]

As long as the HEAD COACH (not any assistant) is not being confrontational -- either with the officials or the opposing player -- and is serving purely to pull his player(s) out of any fight, I'm going to rule he was beckoned and he won't be penalized. Note that my leash will be extremely short at this point, but if he can help, I'll take it.

The best advice I can give anyone on this rule is to carefully read it, then get 2 other officials, call yourself a crew, then come up with a scenario and work through it. We did that a few years ago at a chapter meeting and while we always need a refresher, it really helped understand the rule.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

As long as the HEAD COACH (not any assistant) is not being confrontational, either with the officials or the opposing player, and is serving purely to pull his player(s) out of any fight, I'm going to rule he was beckoned and he won't be penalized. Note that my leash will be extremely short at this point, but if he can help, I'll take it.

Agree, even the assistants are welcome in my game if they want to lend a hand.

[Chess Ref]

Originally Posted by Juulie Downs

I can't comment on the "how many ft's and for whom" part of the OP, but I noticed the above. While this may be the "recognized" signal for ejection in that area, it's not officially correct, is it? Not criticizing, just checking...

Alot of refs in this area use this signal for ejection.

I don't ,I try and keep it low key. Quitely go to coach and give him/her the spiel and away we go.

[BktBallRef]

Looks to me like 2 FTs for the original live ball INT foul, a flagrant T for throwing the player to the floor after the INT foul, which is another 2 FTs. I think those are two different incidents, one live ball, one dead ball. 4 FTs for BV.

I agree 2 FTs for Rio and the ball at the division line.

With that said, I hope I never have this situation. The NFHS rules on fighting and leaving the bench are a clusterf**k.

Chess Ref, I think you said you know the guy in the sleeves. How did all this play out?

[Chess Ref]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Looks to me like 2 FTs for the original live ball INT foul, a flagrant T for throwing the player to the floor after the INT foul, which is another 2 FTs. I think those are two different incidents, one live ball, one dead ball. 4 FTs for BV.

I agree 2 FTs for Rio and the ball at the division line.

With that said, I hope I never have this situation. The NFHS rules on fighting and leaving the bench are a clusterf**k.

Chess Ref, I think you said you know the guy in the sleeves. How did all this play out?

I posted a link to the protest story.They ended up 6 free throws and 2 free throws. I haven't heard specifics.

I haven't called him, he's got alot on his plate right now. But the story will come in in drips and drabs over the next week.