Interesting Technical Situation

[Nevadaref]

Once the officials screw up and put the ball in play while one team has six people on the court, there is nothing that can be done to avoid assessing a technical foul whether we like it or not. The rules simply require it.

True, that this was the mistake of the officiating crew for not communicating better, but the ball became live and that's the end of it.

The technical foul is not charged to any specific individual. It is a TEAM technical foul per 10-1-6.

[Adam]

I'm sorry, but there's no way I'm charging the T on this one. It's the equivalent of a cop getting in your car and asking how fast your car can go before giving you a speeding ticket.
This isn't even like the officials forgetting to count. The kid was beckoned onto the court.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I'm sorry, but there's no way I'm charging the T on this one. [snip]
This isn't even like the officials forgetting to count. The kid was beckoned onto the court.

So are you going to erase the game action which took place?
Are you resetting the game clock to what it was prior to the throw-in and re-doing the throw-in as if the play never happened?
What rules support do you have for that?

[Ignats75]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

So are you going to erase the game action which took place?
Are you resetting the game clock to what it was prior to the throw-in and re-doing the throw-in as if the play never happened?
What rules support do you have for that?

2-3 supports anything I want it to support. Since one of my partners being an idiot isn't covered expressly in the rules, I am using that clause to fix the situation without a T.

If we have definite knowledge of time, we'll reset the clock. If not, we're moving on. We are after all only talking about a couple of seconds here.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Ignats75

2-3 supports anything I want it to support. Since one of my partners being an idiot isn't covered expressly in the rules, I am using that clause to fix the situation without a T.

If we have definite knowledge of time, we'll reset the clock. If not, we're moving on. We are after all only talking about a couple of seconds here.

I believe that is a very poor attitude to take.

This is a game played by humans and officiated by humans. Mistakes are certain to occur. I believe that one should deal with them according to the prescribed methods, not as one simply feels like doing.

[just another ref]

There are times when you simply gotta do what you gotta do. No T here.


If you feel that you must quote a rule to justify, this play is a poster child for 2-3.

[amusedofficial]

2-3 states that "The referee shall make decisions on any points not specifically covered in the rules."

It is a slippery slope to use this rule to make the situation conform to one's sense of fairness when one perceives fairness to be at odds with a procedure specifically covered in the rules.

2-3 is not a royal charter, nor a grant of omnipotence to the R, nor are the rules writers authorizing a do-over.

Oh, and if someone starts lecturing me to "don't effin" this that or the other thing as the first words out of his/her mouth in pregame, I'm going to have questions about his/her professionalism.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

This is a game played by humans and officiated by humans. Mistakes are certain to occur. I believe that one should deal with them according to the prescribed methods, not as one simply feels like doing.

Are you kidding me? You have said some silly things, but this is one of the sillier ones in relation to the situation described. If the C blows his whistle and the sub is beckoned and the ding-dong T brings the ball in anyway, you're going to call a T for 6 players on the court? You're going to penalize the kids for an official's mistake. Brilliant.

[ODJ]

Originally Posted by Smitty

Are you kidding me? You have said some silly things, but this is one of the sillier ones in relation to the situation described. If the C blows his whistle and the sub is beckoned and the ding-dong T brings the ball in anyway, you're going to call a T for 6 players on the court? You're going to penalize the kids for an official's mistake. Brilliant.

Amen.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

So are you going to erase the game action which took place?
Are you resetting the game clock to what it was prior to the throw-in and re-doing the throw-in as if the play never happened?
What rules support do you have for that?

I'm going to assume this is caught almost immediately, otherwise the OP doesn't make any sense. There shouldn't be any action to erase; simply pick up at POI. Now, if the team actually has 6 playing ball, that's a different story.

Look, if the officials forget to count and 6 play, call the T. That's the coach's fault pure and simple. If, however, an official beckons a player onto the court and his teammate promptly leaves, there's no way I'm calling that T. The spirit and intent of this rule is to prevent a team from actually having 6 players play, not to penalize a coach for an official actually calling him onto the court.

Rule support? The applicable Ts here are:

1. A sub coming in without being beckoned. This isn't applicable.
2. Having more than 5 players "participating simultaneously." Define "participating" for me here, because the play I'm envisioning does not have them all actively participating.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I'm going to assume this is caught almost immediately, otherwise the OP doesn't make any sense. There shouldn't be any action to erase; simply pick up at POI.

I have stood there with my hand up only to have my partner not verify my count and inbound the ball early.

TWEEEEEEEET! Hold on sparky (Glare at partner).

No T from me either.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I'm going to assume this is caught almost immediately, otherwise the OP doesn't make any sense. There shouldn't be any action to erase; simply pick up at POI. Now, if the team actually has 6 playing ball, that's a different story.

Look, if the officials forget to count and 6 play, call the T. That's the coach's fault pure and simple. If, however, an official beckons a player onto the court and his teammate promptly leaves, there's no way I'm calling that T. The spirit and intent of this rule is to prevent a team from actually having 6 players play, not to penalize a coach for an official actually calling him onto the court.

Rule support? The applicable Ts here are:

1. A sub coming in without being beckoned. This isn't applicable.
2. Having more than 5 players "participating simultaneously." Define "participating" for me here, because the play I'm envisioning does not have them all actively participating.

Precisely, saved me plenty of typing. Additionally, with C having stop signal, hand up it gives erroneous information to player still on court. He rightfully sees officials signal that ball is still dead.

One of our top clinicians in Illinois preaches that there will be no T's in this almost exact situation. It's about being fair.

I make this call in a close varsity game, and it's back to Saturday morning B games from all assignors.

[chartrusepengui]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

So are you going to erase the game action which took place?
Are you resetting the game clock to what it was prior to the throw-in and re-doing the throw-in as if the play never happened?
What rules support do you have for that?

I would think that this would fall under the "intent" of the rule. No T from me on this one.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The technical foul is not charged to any specific individual. It is a TEAM technical foul per 10-1-6.

I agree that's the penalty if a T is assessed.

In the OP -- if the C still had his/her hand up, waiting for B1 to leave, then the ball never became live, despite U2's best efforts. No T, reset everything, administer the throw-in.

If C dropped his hand, indicating play should resume, and the U2 administers the throw-in, then you have no choice but to assess the T.

(Of course, maybe it's a stretch to assume C used proper mechanics. So, change the above to "if C knew before the ball became live that B1 hadn't left, no T. Otherwise T.")

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

In the OP -- if the C still had his/her hand up, waiting for B1 to leave, then the ball never became live, despite U2's best efforts. No T, reset everything, administer the throw-in.

If C dropped his hand, indicating play should resume, and the U2 administers the throw-in, then you have no choice but to assess the T.

(Of course, maybe it's a stretch to assume C used proper mechanics. So, change the above to "if C knew before the ball became live that B1 hadn't left, no T. Otherwise T.")

This is what isn't clear in the OP. Did C signal that play was ready to begin? Was C under the impression the ball was again live? Or was, in his mind, the ball still dead because he was waiting for the substitution to be complete?

Whether C is using proscribed mechanics or not, if the ball is dead in his mind, he has the ability to say "I'm still holding up play for this to complete. The ball never became live."

Obviously if I'm standing on the court with my hand up like I should be in the situation it's much easier to explain, but regardless, the ball is dead if I (as an official) want it to be.