Murphy's Law in Mass

[Camron Rust]

...or he contacted the thrower for an intentional foul instead of a technical foul and the writer didn't know the difference.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

...or he contacted the thrower for an intentional foul instead of a technical foul and the writer didn't know the difference.

Since it was only the 1st quarter this seems very plausible.

[Amesman]

Seems kinda odd that only the assistant coach is quoted. Thought I was eventually going to read the head coach was tossed.

[amusedofficial]

Got more details. The fouls were for 1) unsporting conduct and 2)for touching or dislodging the ball on a throw-in. Apparently the calling official said he didn't want to eject the kid for the second T so he didn't! The state association has a rule that disqualification for two technicals means a suspension, so they rsuspended him for the next playoff game anyway.

This all apparently happened in the first quarter and the kid went on to score a boatload. The opposing coach must be beside himself.

Tournament officials, too.

[Adam]

From whom did you get those details?

[amusedofficial]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

From whom did you get those details?

take your pick

Lynn English's Woumn hit with 1-game suspension - The Boston Globe

Lynn English star suspended - BostonHerald.com

Krause: Don't blame MIAA for English predicament

Bulldogs' Woumn suspended, but Prep still has tall order - SalemNews.com, Salem, MA

apparently this school has some kind of recruiting scandal on top of all this

[Adam]

Well then, this is what happens when officials insert their own opinions into the rules. I'm not a fan of the MIAA (handshakes), but they did the right thing here.

[sseltser]

Originally Posted by amusedofficial

Apparently the calling official said he didn't want to eject the kid for the second T so he didn't! T

Found the applicable rule:

10-3-PENALTY-NOTE-EXCEPTION: If the official who charges a single flagrant technical foul or the second technical foul isn't in the mood to disqualify the offending player, then 10-3-PENALTY-NOTE doesn't apply, and the player may continue playing.

[bradfordwilkins]

Originally Posted by sseltser

Found the applicable rule:

10-3-PENALTY-NOTE-EXCEPTION: If the official who charges a single flagrant technical foul or the second technical foul isn't in the mood to disqualify the offending player, then 10-3-PENALTY-NOTE doesn't apply, and the player may continue playing.

I'm in a particularly gullible mood this morning and don't have my books in the office; I assume this is a joke lol...

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by amusedofficial

Got more details. The fouls were for 1) unsporting conduct and 2)for touching or dislodging the ball on a throw-in. Apparently the calling official said he didn't want to eject the kid for the second T so he didn't! The state association has a rule that disqualification for two technicals means a suspension, so they suspended him for the next playoff game anyway.

This all apparently happened in the first quarter and the kid went on to score a boatload. The opposing coach must be beside himself.

Tournament officials, too.

Oh my.......

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by amusedofficial

Got more details. The fouls were for 1) unsporting conduct and 2)for touching or dislodging the ball on a throw-in. Apparently the calling official said he didn't want to eject the kid for the second T so he didn't! The state association has a rule that disqualification for two technicals means a suspension, so they rsuspended him for the next playoff game anyway.

This all apparently happened in the first quarter and the kid went on to score a boatload. The opposing coach must be beside himself.

Tournament officials, too.

Can you get a follow up on this? In my neck of the woods, that official could be toast for any tournament games in the coming years.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by fullor30

Can you get a follow up on this? In my neck of the woods, that official could be toast for any tournament games in the coming years.

If true, that might be correct for most necks of the woods.

The bottom line is that you should just follow the rules in cases like this. Never inject your own personal beliefs. Let the governing body decide what they want to do next. That's their job, not our's.

JMO....

[Adam]

My first year officiating high school ball, I had a boys soph game in which I had this very scenario. Early in the game I give him a T for reaching across and slapping the ball on a throw-in. Later, I have to ring him up for complaining about a no-call.
When I called the state to file the report, they said they weren't concerned about it and wouldn't suspend him since only one T fit what they considered to be a sportsmanship issue.

Granted, it wasn't a playoff game, but still....

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by fullor30

Can you get a follow up on this? In my neck of the woods, that official could be toast for any tournament games in the coming years.

And what about that official's partners, who conspired in this travesty? Seems that plenty of toast should be in the offing.

[biz]

I'll give the officials the benefit of the doubt here (until I found out otherwise). I (hope) don't think that they intentionally assessed the incorrect penalty. My hope is that the three of them had a huge brain cramp and kicked the rule. It's not a whole lot better, but it's better than setting aside the rules.