Coaching Box Question
 

This issue was raised in another thread, and I want to see what the veteran posters think. Head coach gets ejected in the 1st half. Is the assistant now allowed to stand, or does the loss of the box for HC mean loss of the box for all? I admit that I had always assumed that once it's gone, it's gone, but looking at the language of the rule and considering some other possibilities, I'm no longer sure.

The rule says that the 1st direct or indirect to HC "results in loss of coaching box privilege and the head coach must remain seated. . ." We say that the assistant doesn't get to stand because only the HC can stand, and we dumped him. But, if we extend that logic, what happens when a player on the bench MF's us? Rule says we charge that indirectly to HC, but we dumped the HC. We can't have it both ways, can we?

Loss of box is permanent for the game. No second chance after ejection. Why would you reward a team for extremely bad behavior?:rolleyes:

Let me just pose this question.

Do you really think the rules committee wants the team to gain an advantage (renewed use of the coaching box) from their coach earning a 2nd direct T?

HAH! Beat you to it!

I've been asking that question all day in the other thread. :)

We aren't having it both ways. IMO, in HS (FED), the adult replacing the HC is now acting as HC and has all the same privelelges that the HC had when ejected. We need to quit thinking of it as "the HC is seatbelted" and think of it only as "coaching box priveleges are gone."

Doesn't count. Its off topic. :D

Shut up.

Scratch:

I could not have said it better myself. Well done lad.

MTD, Sr.

Come on, give yourself some credit. Your spelling would have been better.

From 10.5.1 SITUATION F: ...Whenever the coach has been charged (directly or indirectly) with a technical foul , he/she shall be informed that the privilege of using the coaching box has been lost for the entire game...

Slightly off-topic (from the category of "I did not know that":
From 10.5.1 SITUATION E:...However, if the coach begins the game by sitting somewhere other than where the box is located, he/she may not use the box privileges any time during the game. The coach must begin the game in a position within the box if he/she wishes to stand when permitted under the optional coaching-box provisions.

I wonder how many cowards are afraid to enforce this rule. :D

Thanks for that bit of info. I definitely did not know that. And I am probably one of those cowards you refer to. But, I like to think of it as game management not cowardice. ;)

Had it in our regional game the other night. We told the coach we would enforce it. He chose to sit in the box to start the game.

From 2005-2006 points of emphasis:

"D. Coaching box: The committee wants coaches to stay in the coaching box. There is a constant problem when coaches wander...

Once the coaching box has been removed because of a technical foul, all related rules restrictions must apply. There's no way to get the box back after the privilege has been lost."

http://www.nfhs.org/web/2005/05/2005..._emphasis.aspx

To me that says once the privilege has been removed, it can't come back.

Sort of a side question. If the HC is ejected does this mean that any T's that would have been indirectly applied to the HC do not get applied to the AC? I would say they can't because the AC doesn't magically become the HC, he's still the AC.

Yes or no?

Not true. I'm now offering a "coaches technical foul" rider on my foul insurance policy.

Check the past interps!!!
 

Guys,
When a question like this comes up all that you need to do is consult the past interps archive! ;)

2001-02 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations

SITUATION 9: At the end of their pre-game warm-up, players A1, A4, A5, A9 each dunk the ball and subsequently leave the floor and go to their dressing room. RULING: A technical foul is assessed to each player. The game starts with eight (8) free throws (2 for each of the technical fouls) and the ball is awarded to B at the division line opposite the table. Four team fouls toward the bonus are assessed to A. The head coach of A is assessed an indirect technical foul for each offense (4) and is subsequently ejected from the contest. Any coach assuming the responsibilities of the head coach for the game would not have the use of the coaching box. (10-3-5; 10-5 Pen)

Now you can cease debating this. :D

Is this where I get to say "I told you so"?

You obviously are not yet an esteemed member.

I reminded both VB coaches of that last night.:)

Nevada:

When I posted this question, I figured it had been handled in some casebook play somewhere. Just had to wait for you to enlighten me once again.

I know you have an archive of past interps posted. Is it searchable, meaning by keyword?

Sure, just open the thread entitled "Past Interps Archive" and use the pull down menu "Search this Thread" just above the first post. :)

This feature is available for all threads on this forum. ;)

Just open the thread and hit CTRL-F (at least under IE). You can search any text-based web-site.

Works for Firefox, too, on Windows.

On a Mac, it's simply COMMAND-F.

Control-F works for Google Chrome, too.

Ignats!! You got a "shut up" from Snaqs. I think that officially qualifies you as an "esteemed member"!! Congrats!!

This is, IMHO, one of the most stupid, over-officious, interpretations ever. (Right up there with it has to be an intentional foul if the coach yells "Foul".) You're going to deny a coach the privilege of standing for the entire game because he sat 13' from the endline, instead of 14' from the endline? :(

I thought there was an interpretation that said this isn't necessarily an intentional because it is part of their strategy?

NOW there is. But a couple years ago, we were instructed to call an intentional foul anytime we heard the coach yell "FOUL!" That lasted one year, because it was so. . . incorrect.

Okay, that's what I thought...thanks.

FWIW.
"Must call the intentional foul" was put in place in Rules 2000-01
It was cancelled in Rules 2005-06.

Time flies, eh Scrappy?

Anyone wanting to be an esteemed member can send my campaign a check for $10,000, or hire my wife at $100,000 per year.

Ah, you must be a Blago-bro.

Just a huge fan. The entertainment value alone....