Technical foul situation

[bob jenkins]

By rule, I think so.

If the official knows the facts as presented in the question, iI'd try to only have one T (once A1 gives his jersey to the coach, he's no longer a team member.)

[WhistlesAndStripes]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

SNIP...once A1 gives his jersey to the coach, he's no longer a team member.

Really??

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

By rule, I think so.

If the official knows the facts as presented in the question, iI'd try to only have one T (once A1 gives his jersey to the coach, he's no longer a team member.)

Agree. Short of tackling the player, I don't see what else the coach could have done.

[Jurassic Referee]

Give the player a "T" under R10-3-6(h).

The new rule (10-5-5) says that the head coach can't let team members leave the bench area for an unauthorized reason. Sooooo....authorize it.

In the COMMENTS ON THE 2010-11 RULES REVISIONS for 10-5-5, it also says team members are required to remain on the court or in the bench area while the game is in progress until each quarter or extra period has officially ended. This happened after the end of a quarter, didn't it?

Don't be a plumber.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Give the player a "T" under R10-3-6(h).

The new rule (10-5-5) says that the head coach can't let team members leave the bench area for an unauthorized reason. Sooooo....authorize it.

In the COMMENTS ON THE 2010-11 RULES REVISIONS for 10-5-5, it also says team members are required to remain on the court or in the bench area while the game is in progress until each quarter or extra period has officially ended. This happened after the end of a quarter, didn't it?

Don't be a plumber.

Agreed. I've never understood the mentality of wanting to assess multiple Ts for a single act. There are obviously times where it's necessary or required (e.g., coming off the bench to block the last second three-point shot, or a fight situation). But if the kid is throwing a tantrum, and runs afoul of multiple sportsmanship rules, why would any reasonable official want to hand out more than a single T?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

I've never understood the mentality of wanting to assess multiple Ts for a single act. There are obviously times where it's necessary or required (e.g., coming off the bench to block the last second three-point shot, or a fight situation). But if the kid is throwing a tantrum, and runs afoul of multiple sportsmanship rules, why would any reasonable official want to hand out more than a single T?

Yup. Let the punishment fit the crime. And in this particular situation, the coach didn't commit a crime. All he really did was ...coach.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Give the player a "T" under R10-3-6(h).

The new rule (10-5-5) says that the head coach can't let team members leave the bench area for an unauthorized reason. Sooooo....authorize it.

In the COMMENTS ON THE 2010-11 RULES REVISIONS for 10-5-5, it also says team members are required to remain on the court or in the bench area while the game is in progress until each quarter or extra period has officially ended. This happened after the end of a quarter, didn't it?

Don't be a plumber.

Upon further review, I don't agree with myself.

The incident happened between quarters. The player is bench personnel as JAR pointed out. Give A1 a "T" under R10-4-1(h) and give the head coach an indirect "T" as per R10-4PENALTY Art.1

But that's it. No further "T"S for the walk-off.

Bad self. Bad, bad self.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

By rule, I think so.

If the official knows the facts as presented in the question, iI'd try to only have one T (once A1 gives his jersey to the coach, he's no longer a team member.)

Why is he no longer a team member?

[RobbyinTN]

I would not have given two Ts for the same incident. Maybe I am wrong in not doing so but I guess I would have missed it.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by RobbyinTN

I would not have given two Ts for the same incident. Maybe I am wrong in not doing so but I guess I would have missed it.

It's definitely two T's. The question is should there be a third T?

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Why is he no longer a team member?

What is the definition of team member?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

What is the definition of team member?

Without looking, it's bench personnel in uniform eligible to become a player.
This guy had fouled out, he was already not eligible, so why did handing the jersey to the coach make him no longer a team member?

[ODJ]

Kid gets pissed at his coach, tosses jersey at him, and leaves.

I doubt I'd T anything. He's not playing again for that coach. Let him walk off and get the quarter started. Why punish the team.

[WhistlesAndStripes]

Originally Posted by ODJ

Kid gets pissed at his coach, tosses jersey at him, and leaves.

I doubt I'd T anything. He's not playing again for that coach. Let him walk off and get the quarter started. Why punish the team.

Are you kidding?? This one's automatic. I'd probably just hit him with one and be done with it. And I'd bet my bottom dollar the kid is back playing next game.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Without looking, it's bench personnel in uniform eligible to become a player.
This guy had fouled out, he was already not eligible, so why did handing the jersey to the coach make him no longer a team member?

While it does say that, I think that it does so without considering DQ's. Someone who is DQ'd is still a team member....even though they can no longer play.