Interesting T redoux

[JRutledge]

I think this is really bad. This kid right or wrong has had other incidents that have called his behavior into question. He was thrown off the team a year ago for a confrontation in the post season by the coach. Even if this decision by the official was judgmentally wrong, this kid has done other things that got him into a little trouble. What is to say the next time he will not expect to be bailed out if he behaves in an unsportsmanlike manner? I am not sure I agree with the official's decision, but this seems worse to me.

Peace

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I think this is really bad. This kid right or wrong has had other incidents that have called his behavior into question.

What do those events have to do with this call? Nothing.

He was thrown off the team a year ago for a confrontation in the post season by the coach. Even if this decision by the official was judgmentally wrong, this kid has done other things that got him into a little trouble.

Again, what does this stuff have to do with the play in question? Nothing.

What is to say the next time he will not expect to be bailed out if he behaves in an unsportsmanlike manner? I am not sure I agree with the official's decision, but this seems worse to me.

I agree that the state association's decision really looks like they aren't backing up their officials, and that is disturbing. But, they really had to believe that the officials got it wrong during the game for them to overturn it, especially since you told us they usually back up their officials really well.

I just don't see what things like his past behavior, the score of the game, whether or not he got a T earlier in the game, or why the coach had him in have to do with the call in question itself.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by zm1283

What do those events have to do with this call? Nothing.

Again, what does this stuff have to do with the play in question? Nothing.

It does in some way, because he has been displined before for his behavior. That means that this is not his first run in with authority figures. And if this is the "extention of the classroom" which we are told often from the NF, the previous behavior matters in education to whether a student is expelled or suspended (and the length of that suspension). So why should this kid get a pass when not only was he ejected for two Ts, but one of the Ts was a result of an unsportsmanlike act? The player/coach/administrators history always plays a role in this situation.

Originally Posted by zm1283

I agree that the state association's decision really looks like they aren't backing up their officials, and that is disturbing. But, they really had to believe that the officials got it wrong during the game for them to overturn it, especially since you told us they usually back up their officials really well.

I just don't see what things like his past behavior, the score of the game, whether or not he got a T earlier in the game, or why the coach had him in have to do with the call in question itself.

Because if he has been in trouble before, if you allow to make an exception for him now, do not get upset when the same thing happens again. I have no problem with rules being changed or having a policy to review ejections. But would they have done this for some kid that was the 12 person on the bench and no one knew his or her name? I seriously doubt it and they will get more appeals in the future and possibly legal issues because they took this action.

There is a kid at a Chicago school suing a school because he was found cheating (just this week). Should the school change their position in that case because the school stands for a certain academic standard? And the basis for the lawsuit is that it will ruin the reputation of the kid that was found cheating. There has to be a line drawn somewhere.

Peace

[mutantducky]

I guess you know better along with the people from the league. From an outside point of view the T looks like it was uncalled for. I think you have to put the other things aside unless he was warned for it and they added up in the game. I would support the revoking of the T but again I don't know the whole story.

[Adam]

The thing is, they seem to be saying it was the right call, but not an unsportsmanlike act. I had a player earn his first T by slapping the ball during a throwin once, then his second came later for arguing a call. The state, when I called to report the ejection, said he would not be suspended since they didn't consider the first T to be a sportsmanship issue.

This may be a similar situation.

[grunewar]

"Richmond, the Sun-Times Player of the Year and an Illinois recruit, received two technical fouls in the Bulldogs win over Fremd on Friday and was ejected from the game. IHSA rules state that if a player is ejected from a game for unsportsmanlike conduct, he cannot play in the next game....."

Concur with JRut - this incident reminds me of the OJ Mayo incident a few yrs ago where he received the two T's in a HS game. His "case" actually went to court so he could play in the upcoming nationally televised ESPN game and not be suspended. AND as I recall, he won and played in the ESPN game!

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by grunewar

"Richmond, the Sun-Times Player of the Year and an Illinois recruit, received two technical fouls in the Bulldogs win over Fremd on Friday and was ejected from the game. IHSA rules state that if a player is ejected from a game for unsportsmanlike conduct, he cannot play in the next game....."

Concur with JRut - this incident reminds me of the OJ Mayo incident a few yrs ago where he received the two T's in a HS game. His "case" actually went to court so he could play in the upcoming nationally televised ESPN game and not be suspended. AND as I recall, he won and played in the ESPN game!

I think the Richmond and Mayo cases are very, very different.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I think this is really bad. This kid right or wrong has had other incidents that have called his behavior into question. He was thrown off the team a year ago for a confrontation in the post season by the coach. Even if this decision by the official was judgmentally wrong, this kid has done other things that got him into a little trouble. What is to say the next time he will not expect to be bailed out if he behaves in an unsportsmanlike manner? I am not sure I agree with the official's decision, but this seems worse to me.

Peace

I concur,although I'm not taking baggage from another game/ season into this game. But he does have a history.

[Juulie Downs]

Originally Posted by fullor30

I concur,although I'm not taking baggage from another game/ season into this game. But he does have a history.

I agree that the ref shouldn't bring the history in, but as Jeff says, the administrators of the district or league definitely should consider it, and IMHO it should weigh more heavily against giving the exception.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by fullor30

I concur,although I'm not taking baggage from another game/ season into this game. But he does have a history.

If you do this for a kid that has a history, what are you going to do for the kid that has no history? You just wait this will become an epidemic with coaches and kids wanting the same treatment for situations on tape or not on tape. I think the IHSA created a situation they are going to have to deal with for sometime.

Peace

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If you do this for a kid that has a history, what are you going to do for the kid that has no history? You just wait this will become an epidemic with coaches and kids wanting the same treatment for situations on tape or not on tape. I think the IHSA created a situation they are going to have to deal with for sometime.

Peace

I agree, Can you imagine if the 7th, 8th guy on the team called the coach out as Richmond did last year do you think he'd even be on the team? As I think you mentioned if some bench player was in same situation with two T's
would there even be a discussion?

Nobody said life was fair and it happens everywhere.

I sympathize with the official(who I'm friendly with) who will forever be known for the call that was overturned.

All this for 55-60 bucks a game.............

[Amesman]

Originally Posted by fullor30

I agree, Can you imagine if the 7th, 8th guy on the team called the coach out as Richmond did last year do you think he'd even be on the team?

I sympathize with the official(who I'm friendly with) who will forever be known for the call that was overturned.

All this for 55-60 bucks a game.............

Learned that Richmond was booted off the team with a few games to go in the regular season last year, apparently after calling out the (still new) coach, and a fight with a teammate even earlier in the year. Somehow in the off-season, though, he and his camp decided it would be better to stay at the 4,000-kid high school and NOT attend his third school in three years, so he's behaved on court for the most part.

-- Another thing: Although his call has been totally scrutinized, your friend technically didn't get overturned. He didn't say somebody couldn't play in the next game. He just made a call on the court. Maybe the state administrator got it right: The official was justified but the spirit of the state's rule (two unsporting T's and you miss a game) was not broached. What's that famous saying for us: Just get it right. (All that said, that administrator has opened Pandora's Box and I wouldn't want to be in his shoes ...)

One of the most chilling aspects of this is, whether you're in Alaska or Chicago, you can expect not only videotape of games to circulate, but it now can be used as a pretty powerful weapon on You Tube -- as Dad Richmond demonstrated here with his posting of the video and recruiting of folks to view and deluge the association with complaints. Not that anything ought to be backroom-ed or swept under the rug, but it's a new day out there for us, ladies and gentlemen. Scrutiny is good, but where does it start and stop?

So to answer someone's question from the other thread yesterday why we even bothered discussing this in a forum like this, it's because a campaign like this can happen to any one of us. And you better believe more of this will happen in the future.

And I'm not just talking about when Padgett whistles the phantom hack with 0:00.1 remaining in a tie game just to avoid going into OT.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Amesman

Learned that Richmond was booted off the team with a few games to go in the regular season last year, apparently after calling out the (still new) coach, and a fight with a teammate even earlier in the year.

Actually he was kicked off the team at the last game of the year if I recall correctly. And it was because he got into it with the coach both at halftime and after the game. I applauded the administration at the time taking care of business.

Peace

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by Amesman

Learned that Richmond was booted off the team with a few games to go in the regular season last year, apparently after calling out the (still new) coach, and a fight with a teammate even earlier in the year. Somehow in the off-season, though, he and his camp decided it would be better to stay at the 4,000-kid high school and NOT attend his third school in three years, so he's behaved on court for the most part.

-- Another thing: Although his call has been totally scrutinized, your friend technically didn't get overturned. He didn't say somebody couldn't play in the next game. He just made a call on the court. Maybe the state administrator got it right: The official was justified but the spirit of the state's rule (two unsporting T's and you miss a game) was not broached. What's that famous saying for us: Just get it right. (All that said, that administrator has opened Pandora's Box and I wouldn't want to be in his shoes ...)

One of the most chilling aspects of this is, whether you're in Alaska or Chicago, you can expect not only videotape of games to circulate, but it now can be used as a pretty powerful weapon on You Tube -- as Dad Richmond demonstrated here with his posting of the video and recruiting of folks to view and deluge the association with complaints. Not that anything ought to be backroom-ed or swept under the rug, but it's a new day out there for us, ladies and gentlemen. Scrutiny is good, but where does it start and stop?

So to answer someone's question from the other thread yesterday why we even bothered discussing this in a forum like this, it's because a campaign like this can happen to any one of us. And you better believe more of this will happen in the future.

And I'm not just talking about when Padgett whistles the phantom hack with 0:00.1 remaining in a tie game just to avoid going into OT.

I'll preface this by saying I'm friendly with him, I'm not close enough to call him a friend. He's a good official.

Funny, I spoke to the player tonight and told him I saw his LeBron crab step, to which he laughed and admitted he did travel.

I've chatted with him a few times in the past and he seems like a good kid.

[Raymond]

IMO, I think Illinois' governing body is going by the "spirit and intent" of the suspension rule which is to penalize players/coaches who get ejected for sportsmanship issues.

From the time I got wind of this story my intuition told me that this suspension would most likely get overturned.

Also, I don't consider the decision as a slap in the face of the officials. The ruling doesn't take any issue with the official's judgement on the 2nd T.