So, how'd you like a game to start like THIS?
 

Got this email from a friend this morning:

I was at work today chatting with a co-worker whom has a son on a local JV team. After the JV game they stayed and watched the varsity game. The last that starting player that was announced in the pre-game intros pulled a LeBron James and throws a hand full of powder into the air. They tried to clean the floor but the powder created a slippery mess and for safety reasons the game was moved to a different court.

Was the kid penalized?

My friend had a similar situation, but it was from the V team's fans. They did the "LeBron" thing and the dust got onto the floor on one end. The game was delayed 25 minutes to clean up the floor.

No one they could penalize.

Imitation is the best form of a lack of imagination.......

Why would you state that there is no one to penalize?

Either team can be penalized with a team technical foul for delaying the start of either half by a full minute.

If the followers of one team are clearly the guilty party, then that is the proper team to penalize.

WHACK!

While I understand your logic, I'm not sure it can be fully supported by rule. In Rich's scenario, it was clearly one of the last players introduced. However, (I'm assuming) the team was on the floor, ready to play; it's just that the custodians were holding the game up trying to clean the floor. So, it is more similar to the scenario of holding up play while wiping up spilled water after a TO. I know the warning for delay clearly states it is to be recorded after a TO, and this is the start of the game. But I would think putting the warning for delay in the book is the better route to go. This way, ANY delay from here on out by the same team will result in the T.

You can whack still. Put it on the bench. He isn't a player yet. Still bench personnel. Unsporting could be an option. He is bringing the attention to himself.

Last resort, complain to espn or someone and they will fine him for pregame celebration, similar to the super bowl and post touchdown celebration.

But did any of the players do the crab walk? :rolleyes:

I don't see that this meets the requirements for the T or the delay warning. Somebody spell it out for me.

R-u-l-e 10 - 3 - 5 - a . . . . . d-e-l-a-y t-h-e g-a-m-e b-y p-r-e-v-e-n-t-i-n-g t-h-e b-a-l-l f-r-o-m b-e-i-n-g m-a-d-e l-i-v-e o-r f-r-o-m b-e-i-n-g p-u-t i-n p-l-a-y.


O-K ?

So whack the custodians. :D

But seriously: would they be delaying the game if not for the kid's antics? The kid clearly caused the cause of the delay, and thus caused the delay. ;)

I'd lose no sleep over a T here.

So, do the mops shoot the FT's? And which bucket do they shoot at? :confused:

Anyway, while I may not lose much sleep if you were to call the T, I would try to talk you out of it initially and try to talk you into a delay warning instead. How is it significantly different than delaying the game because they had to wipe up spilled water off the floor? Sure, you can say it took significantly longer to wipe up the powder, but I don't see any time limit in the delay provisions that say after a certain amount of time for cleanup, go directly to a T rather than giving the warning.

The advantage to the warning is now that team will get the T for any other delay for the rest of the game.

The action did cause a delay - but not a minute or two to towel up some water - they actually had to move to a different court. Not the same thing IMHO. WHACK!!!! As stated before they did it to draw attention to themselves and get a "yay John" from the fans. It was unsporting.

Alright, let me ask you this - let's say the floor has a new finish put on it, and there are specific instructions to keep water off the floor until it has finished curing. Then, during a TO, A1 spills some water on the floor that causes the finish to become sticky at that spot. It takes more than a minute or two to try and dry it up, but they figure it's safer to move the game to a different court. Is that also a T, instead of a warning? If so, is it Team Technical, or is it charged to the individual? Is it an indirect to the head coach?

I guess I'm only arguing the reason for the T. If you say the T is because the game was delayed excessively, I would argue against that because there is no time limit mentioned in the rules. If you want to give the T directly to the player for unsporting conduct, I would feel more comfortable with that solution.

my initial judgement was that the action was unsporting. But I would T in either case (delay or sporting) The last scenario you posted with new finish and water is not the same. One is accidental - the other was done on purpose - knowing there would need to be a clean up.

Do they spend time cleaning up after LeBron? Does LeBron's powder-clap delay the start of his games? If not, how can you say this player <B>knew there would need to be a clean up</B>? Had this player done it before and delayed the start of other games? Had he done it before without any issues? Or is this the first time he tried it?

Again, I don't have a big problem with an unsporting T charged directly to the player. But I still don't see how a T for delay can be charged, especially without a prior warning. Also, there's a difference between charging a team technical for delay, and charging an unsporting T directly to the player. The team T only gets added to the team foul count, while the unsporting T also gets charged to the player, and as an indirect to the head coach, since it happened before the game started.

I don't give a rats butt about LeBron or his actions - as juvenile as they appear all too often. I've already told you what I would have done and the reasons. If LeBron takes the 6 steps that the NBE allow - does that also mean we should allow this in HS too? :(

Only on a crab dribble.

Point taken:)

Of course not. I'm not sure where I said that? :confused:

I was only responding to the comments about giving a T for the delay:
How can you back up your statement about the kid <B>knowing</B> there would be a clean up needed? Can you know for certain the kid didn't think he would be able to do it without causing a mess that needed to be cleaned up? That's my point - if the kid watches LeBron do it before games, and there's no delay, how can you say the kid did it on purpose knowing there would be a delay?

Also, please notice the difference in rules between a T for delay, and a T for unsporting conduct. I still have yet to see anyone give me a good rules reason for charging a T for the delay.

Instead of parsing the rules, use common sense as M&M has suggested here. The guy is drawing attention to himself and this is no different than the guy puffing out his shirt after making a basket.

Maybe we shouldn't give a T or a delay - how about a sign to wear that says "idiot in uniform"? Can you say, "common sense"? And if he didn't have it, would you actually believe that no one else knew he was going to do it. Sorry - perhaps he deserves a T for being and idiot.

Careful, we don't get to use common sense; we only get to use the rules. :)
Ok, we agree on this. What's the signal to the table for "Being an idiot"? :D

I think you need to get a real stupid look on your face and drool out the corner of your mouth:D

It is pretty simple. The kid does it to draw attention to himself. There is your T. Makes it easier for the next set of officials too. Kid pulls the jersey out to show the school name, another simple T. The rules are simple. If kids do something to draw attention to themselves we T them.

Signal to the table for "being an idiot" is one hand in a vertical position while the other hand comes over the top in a horizontal position. Aren't most technical fouls for being an idiot?

Don't think he should get one for being.

Huh. That's how I look most of the time. :eek: :D

Too many M&Ms in your mouth at one time can cause this.

Not O-K. The rule you quote is actually 10-1-5-b and the case book examples given are nothing like this.

As far as a player drawing attention to himself, is this any different than the
strutting/high fives/chest bumping that goes on when the starting lineups are introduced?

Excellent question, and I agree that the difference in time is not a significant difference.

The significant difference is that when teams are drinking water during a TO, they're doing something legal. When that dope throws powder all over the floor, he isn't.

Perhaps this point is leading in the direction of an unsporting T, rather than delay...

If it will make you feel better, use 10-1-5-b. That language meets the requirements for a T in this situation also.

O-K ?

Exactly. Can you show me where spilling water on the floor is "legal", but spilling powder isn't? ;)

Again, my hangup is more on the terminolgy used in the calling of the T. A T for a delay is harder to back by rule, unless there was an official warning issued first. Also, a T for delay is a team T, and if the purpose is to penalize the idiot, wouldn't a direct T for unsporting behavior be more appropriate?

Delay or Taunting/unsporting T?
 

The rules actually give you the authority to do either,
RULE 10 Fouls and Penalties
Section 1 Team Technicals
ART. 5 . . . Allow the game to develop into an actionless contest, this includes the following and similar acts:
a. When the clock is not running consuming a full minute through not being ready when it is time to start either half.

Yes they are ready but the direct, and controlable actions of their teammate made the facility unplayable.

Section 3 Player Technicals
ART. 7 . . . Commit an unsporting foul. This includes, but is not limited to, acts or conduct such as:
c. Baiting or taunting an opponent.
If you are going to make the call I think by rule you would have a tougher time selling the Unsporting Technical.

I think this again becomes a game managment situation.
Yes the Kid has done something stupid,
Can we get around starting the game with a T? Probably
If we are going to T the kid what other consequences are involved?
Do they fit the actions and or the context of what is going on?

If a delay of game technical is necessary I can see that - a direct unsporting technical foul might require a little more than a toss of some chalk in the air, I'm not saying I would have a problem, but there is a lot of chest pounding and other stuff that goes one that might fit the same bill before the game as taunting.
So I would be really careful as to which Technical I gave out.

Also remember that the knucklehead that got them their technical still has to start the game, (unless a sudden illness takes him:p) they can sub and sit him down after the clock starts.

If the dealy were only a couple of minutes I might try to avoid any T here, - if it was over 5 minutes I do not think you would have much choice.

Still not OK. I see you actually meant 10-3-5a originally. These rules deal with players not being where they are supposed to be or players slapping the ball away, etc. thus preventing the ball from being put in play.
The play at hand does not seem to fit this rule, in my opinion.

During introductions, A1 bends over and slaps the floor, and dislodges a tile.
There is delay while the floor is repaired.

A1 is unable to play due to a stomach virus, but is in uniform for the game.
He pukes on the court during warmups. The start of the game is delayed for cleanup.

You gonna call a T for these?

No, as I have said before, puking on the court is a violation for an illegal dribble. :p

unforseen consequence of that action

While forseeable still accidental and therefore an exception.

The tossing of the Chalk has a reasonable, foreseeable and preventable outcome, and therefore would be a lot easier to back up with an assignor.
Yes they are readyto play but the direct, and controlable actions of their teammate caused the delay by making the facility unplayable.

While I would be trying not to have to make this call if possible, I can at least back it up.

I meant 10-3-5a originally. I used last year's book to give the old rules citation. I have now gone back and changed it. That rule isn't applicable anyway because the person who threw the powder in the air wasn't a "player". He was still "bench personnel" because the game hadn't started yet. I realized that after I posted.

Rule 10-1-5b is still easily applicable though. It says that it's a team T to allow the game to develop into an actionless contest through delaying the game by preventing the ball being made promptly live or from being put in play. The person being introduced did delay the ball being made promptly live on the opening jump by his actions.

The plays that you outlined above have nothing to do with the play being discussed. They are irrelevant.

O-K ?

10-1-5b-
 

really referes to restarting the game after a time out and the resumption of play procedures,(7-5-1 and 8-1-2)for a throw in or a free throw, then issueing a Technical after the complete cycle of proceedure.

side note
 

Several years ago during second round the ACC conference tournament - a rather well know official was sent home from the tournament, losing at least one possibly two more games), after issuing a Technical foul to North Carolina for delay of game after following, not only the rules but the guidelines given to the officials at the begining of the tournament.

In the first half there were a couple delays with NC having to wipe/dry the floor after having their time out out near the lane area. Early in the second half the game was again delyed by about a minute while the floor was dried after an NC timeout. At this point an official warning was issued for delay of game at this point.

About mid way through the second half after a 30 second time out the floor area of the NC bench was being wiped down and delayed the game again so a technical foul was issued to NC.

Coaches, Fans, Administrators, and Announcers lambasted the referee for making the Technical call in close ball game and the co-ordinator of officials said in a statement after the punishment of the official was made public that he expected better judgement from an official with that much experience in the ACC.

Note during the officails tournament meetings this particular delay of game scenario was a point of emphasis, officials were told that they were to do everything with in their power and the rules to prevent these delays from occuring.

So just be sure you are doing !

Doing the provincials finals last year. Assistant RIC comes in from out of town, and eval'd me on one particular game. I guess he was sleeping during the pre-tournament meeting when the Head RIC quoted a provincial policy regarding the half-time mechanics that referees are to follow.

The As'st RIC's first comment to me: telling me that I mishandled the half-time communication with the coach. His suggestion: exact opposite to the policy set by our governing body. :rolleyes:

If ever a YABUT was justified....

No way jose that floor is not ready for play anyway. Besides spilling water while drinking during a TO & throwing dust for your own aggrandizement before a game are 2 extremely different things IMO. One's a T & the other is common in-game court maintenance.

No. The resumption of play procedure is a completely separate part of rule 10-1-5b.

If the resumption of play procedure does <b>not</b> apply, as is the case in this particular situation, it is an <b>immediate</b> T to delay the game with <b>no</b> prior warning.

Just mark it up as yet another example of a rule that you don't understand.

Enough already.

A vote.

Somebody set up one of those poll thingys. How many would call a T for the clown throwing powder up in the air and delaying the start of the game.


I vote no.

Are you serious? You want to settle a rules question by having a poll? A poll in which anyone without even a basic amount of actual rules knowledge is allowed to have a vote? Great idea! Let the fans, players, coaches and non-qualified officials decide what the rules should be.:rolleyes:

Don't you think that a better alternative might be to submit the question to a member of the NFHS rules committee, a state rules interpreter or a knowledgable, accepted source?

I said 10-1-5b does not apply to the OP period

10-1-5a is specific to this situation
ART. 5 . . . Allow the game to develop into an actionless contest, this includes the following and similar acts:
a. When the clock is not running consuming a full minute through not being ready when it is time to start either half.

there is no need to move beyond this section of the rule because it is specific to the situation.

5b enlists the of the ROP procedure because it is specifically refering to delay situations where it may be possibly to use this procedure rather than going directly to the technical. This situation is not one of them so 5b does not apply here.

He's talking about a poll here on the board. Not official, not binding. Relax.

And just exactly what would the results of said poll actually prove?

ANSWER: ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!

You could have one of the choices of the poll being the person who spilled the powder be castrated and horsewhipped. If 84% of the respondents choose that option, does that mean that is the correct and approved way to handle the situation?

A poll is a complete waste of time and a complete WOBW. That was my point.

Kinda like what your posts are becoming once again.

Good grief. Are you really this full of yourself? 75% of what goes on this board would be considered by someone to be a waste of bandwidth.

Start a poll?

Granted, my example may be bad, but I was simply trying to point out the difference between "accidental" and "on purpose" long delays.
I agree to a point, but which T would you give?

As I see it, the choices are:
T for delay - only charged to team; not to player.
T for unsporting behavior - charged to player, team, and indirect to HC.
Warning for delay - recorded in book, T charged for any other delay in the game.

What if the kid does it, trying to be cool, but sees the gym's HVAC is blowing the dust back unto the floor, gets this "oh, sh!t" look on his face, and is even on his hands and knees with the custodians trying to help clean it up. Would you still call this "on purpose"? If it's clear the kid didn't mean to delay the game, then you've got accidental in-game court maintenance, which is no different than cleaning up water after the TO, which is only a warning.

Another possible scenario - what if, during player intros, teammates are doing chest bumps and high-fives with each other, but one slips and hits their head on the floor and is knocked unconscious. The start of the game is delayed as the trainer attends to the player. So, since self-aggrandizement and the results delay the start of the game, who do you award the T?

My point is many say "give the kid a T for delaying the start of the game", but you cannot, by rule. It is a team T for delay, and it is not charged to the player. If you go with the unsporting T, what if the results are accidental? Then how is it not a warning first?

We could but it might be a waste of time! :D

Time is up. Poll closed.

T 0

No T 1

The no's have it. Don't waste any more of that guy's time and bandwidth.

What if, during introductions, Billy (star player) sees his girlfriend Cindy (hot cheerleader across court) flirting with another guy (visiting team fan)? He throws open water bottle at her, gets water on floor. He did not think the water would hit the floor, only her. She goes to gymnastic equipment to get powder to throw back, and gets it in the water. She did not think it would get on the floor, only him. Now we have a mess on the floor. Do we T or warn Billy, Cindy or the visiting team/fan? Man Oh Man! This used to be a good forum for rules interpretations, but sometimes turns into more of a chat room for bored officials.

Dispose of properly.
 

Just to let you all know, Cindy and I have patched things up. We have a date tonight. Since spring training has begun, I'm going to try to steal third base.

No deposit, no return.
 

Wait until late April. It will get a lot worse, and I'll be leading the parade, but with no images this year.

ha. this story is funny. I'm going to tell the people I play ball with about it. I wonder if LeBron uses something different because that has to go on the court as well. Maybe one day the stat and tv people will sue him because they inhaled so much chalk or whatever it is he uses. :rolleyes:

After some reflection, I agree with M&M that it is MORE appropriate to charge a technical foul for unsporting conduct to a starter who does this as it is definitely an individual attention situation and the NFHS has provided a clear directive to not allow such.

However, if the offenders are in the crowd, as one of the first posters proposed, then the team technical foul is the appropriate call if the start of the game has to be delayed.

Whole new question:

10-1-5: .......not being ready when it is time to start either half.

Who ultimately decides "when it is time to start" the first half?

The OP happened during intros. If game management says "Hold up while we clean the floor," or, for that matter, any number of other reasons, what authority does the official have to say "Game time."

Were the officials told a scheduled game time?

I would consider any deliberate act which prevents starting at that time to be unacceptable.

Is there anything about scheduled times in any book? I don't see how this can apply. If the game is not the first of the night, if there is a time listed, it is often an estimate. What if this were the case and the game was about to start early, before this fiasco happened? Would this have any affect on a potential T?

I can't answer all of the "what ifs." However, I can safely tell you that if everyone is prepared and ready to go, but then some donkey does something silly and causes all of us to wait there is going to be a penalty when I am the referee.

There is solid rules support for that. Use your best judgment to decide when to take such action.

And I have been suggesting that it makes a difference what the donkey was doing. If it's something stupid, then penalize. If a 6-year-old drops his sodey pop and the delay is equally long to get rid of the sticky mess, then that's a different matter.