Fight!!!!!!!

[icallfouls]

If the T official had called the first foul on #24 white for the foul from behind....maybe #23 doesn't do anything....not likely.... but they should have gotten the first one

[Spence]

Originally Posted by representing

10-4-5

Coach wasn't beckoned on from what i can see in the video. He get's a Techincal foul.

If a fight like this breaks out no way I'm whacking a coach who comes out unless he isn't trying to break it up. He's beckoned as far as I'm concerned.

[representing]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Not sure what others will say, but in the aftermath if it is possible you can segregate any players still on the bench from those who went on the court. Then you get who you know were players at the time, then you can ask who was on the court at the time and go from there.

Bottom line, get the teams separated and take your time to get everything, including the penalties, as right as you possibly can.

I was thinking that. When things settle down, tell coaches to keep those that left the bench on the playing court. He could get a Technical for not following the referee's order, couldn't he? wouldn't that fall under Unsporting?

[representing]

Originally Posted by Spence

If a fight like this breaks out no way I'm whacking a coach who comes out unless he isn't trying to break it up. He's beckoned as far as I'm concerned.

I was just saying as far as the rulebook is concerned he should be T'd up. I probably wouldn't have whacked him as far as I'm concern, as long as he helps to break sh*t up.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

First, let's correct a few things in your post to make it readable.



Now, if I understand your point, you are contending that a team member off the bench, who isn't observed fighting, might get away with the disqualifying offense of leaving the bench area because with only his uniform on, not a warm-up top, he would look like a player.

There is much truth in that.

Nevada is certainly right that it's possible in the melee to miss someone who comes off the bench but then returns there. This is why many states will review video any time there has been a fight and dole out additional suspensions/punishment regardless of whether they were 'caught' at the time.

[representing]

just realized, B23 is wearing an illegal shirt, isn't he? Doesn't the shirt have to be completely a solid color? According to 4-1-5 it's illegal, since it is somewhat visible and would be visible while he's playing and the jersey swings around and stuff.

Bad referees

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by representing

10-4-5

Coach wasn't beckoned on from what i can see in the video. He get's a Techincal foul.

PlayerTeam members left bench during a fight, all of them at DQ'd regardless. For each offender that gets involved with a fight, that's an additional Technical. All the playerteam members that left the bench, I don't think they got involved with fighting, but only came on to calm things down. Only one T is given to bench, which is also an Indirect to the coach. Coach now has one T on himself and an indirect from bench.

Since white doesn't seem to have anyone leaving bench, you shoot two FTs only and ball is at POI.

Did I read this right accordingly to the rulebook? I hope you guys are proud of me for actually opening up a rulebook now before running my mouth haha.

Since you are actually making an effort, I'll post a few specifics to help you.
1. Players are the five who are legally in the game. Team members are sitting on the bench. Substitutes are the team members who replace the players by going to the table (or sometimes incorrectly going straight from the bench into the court). So, you can't have "players" leaving the bench.

2. It is not an additional T for a team member to leave the bench and fight. It is merely a different category with a different penalty. The team member is already getting a flagrant T for leaving the bench during the altercation. He doesn't get another one for fighting.

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I don't agree that W10 deserves a flagrant. A T, yes, but after taking a smack to the face, he merely pushed the offender. A DQ for him is not in proportion to the action.

I can agree with a T for the crowd interaction (taunting) by the player from White.

W10 retaliated by pushing the offender...while I agree the action isn't as harsh as the punch... he's gotta go.

Agree to disagree.

[representing]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

2. It is not an additional T for a team member to leave the bench and fight. It is merely a different category with a different penalty. The team member is already getting a flagrant T for leaving the bench during the altercation. He doesn't get another one for fighting.

So is this correct:

Since no one actually got involved, only one T to the bench, coach gets Indirect and sits while all the team members who left bench are DQ'd. But, if any players are involved in a fight, I thought that was another Technical for anyone, and they would shoot 2 FTs additionally to anyone who "fights" as to what the rulebook defines "fight" as.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I don't agree that W10 deserves a flagrant. A T, yes, but after taking a smack to the face, he merely pushed the offender. A DQ for him is not in proportion to the action.

I'm not sure I even give him a technical foul for the shove. It was a fairly mild reaction for getting punched in the face.

OK, I probably would, but it certainly wouldn't be flagrant.

[representing]

Originally Posted by tjones1

W10 retaliated by pushing the offender...while I agree the action isn't as harsh as the punch... he's gotta go.

Agree to disagree.

Found this in the rulebook:

4-18-2

An attempt to instigate a fight by committing an unsporting act that causes a person to retaliate by fighting.

Now, when the B player punched the W player, that would instigate a retaliation. Rule of "fighting" is "an attempt to strike, punch or kick ..."(4-18-1). I don't think pushing would be considered striking, would it? Pushing is its own foul, so I wouldn't consider it flagrant for a light push like that, especially compared to the hard punch he just took to the face (surprised he seemed to have absorbed the punch pretty well, no stumbling or nothing!).

So in my mind I'm thinking just a dead-ball technical foul.

So I'm agreeing to disagree with you. Actually had a coach say that to me last year after a game, didn't think an intentional foul that I called on his player was an intentional. A little back an fourth he said "fine, let's just agree to disagree" and left. I've used that in several games since with a coach.

[Juulie Downs]

Originally Posted by Berkut

I am not a psychologist, but I did stay in a Motel 6 last night.

I think #23 might have some anger management issues.

Ya think?!?

[Juulie Downs]

I think the first one has got to be flagrant. It was way, way past anything related to basketball.

As far as all the aftermath, you do the best you can to keep track of who's where, and try to remember the rules.

I also think that W kid chest-bumping the spectator, and doing some inciting before that was flagrant. And that crowd cheering for whatever was also way scary. I'd rather see them hurling invective and screaming angrily than cheering for their opponents being bad. That really bugs me.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by tjones1

W10 retaliated by pushing the offender...while I agree the action isn't as harsh as the punch... he's gotta go.

Agree to disagree.

Forget that he was punched by #23 Black. Now what would you call for #10 White shoving the opponent as he did?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by representing

Found this in the rulebook:

4-18-2

An attempt to instigate a fight by committing an unsporting act that causes a person to retaliate by fighting.

Now, when the B player punched the W player, that would instigate a retaliation. Rule of "fighting" is "an attempt to strike, punch or kick ..."(4-18-1). I don't think pushing would be considered striking, would it? Pushing is its own foul, so I wouldn't consider it flagrant for a light push like that, especially compared to the hard punch he just took to the face (surprised he seemed to have absorbed the punch pretty well, no stumbling or nothing!).

So in my mind I'm thinking just a dead-ball technical foul.

So I'm agreeing to disagree with you. Actually had a coach say that to me last year after a game, didn't think an intentional foul that I called on his player was an intentional. A little back an fourth he said "fine, let's just agree to disagree" and left. I've used that in several games since with a coach.

That rules tells us that a non-fighting act, such as taunting, can turn into an act of fighting and warrant a flagrant technical foul, IF THE OPPONENT RETALIATES BY FIGHTING. It does not work in the reverse order.