The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 26, 2010, 07:44pm
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
Question Would this have any impact?

Idea for NF rule addition. Since coaches are responsible for the conduct of their players (in theory, anyway), what if a coach received an indirect technical whenever a player on that team was charged with a flagrant foul? I know it would have a fairly minor impact on the administration of the game, but it might make the coach take a greater interest in his or her responsibility for the behavior of their players. I'm not suggesting it happen for any technical or intentional, only flagrant technicals or personals. Just a thought.
__________________
Yom HaShoah
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 26, 2010, 09:20pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
I don't think it happens often enough to be a concen. I don't think I've call 5 flagrant fouls in 20 years.

I'd be more in favor of a technical on the coach for allowing a player to enter the game who is not properly equipped. It works in football.
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott

"You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 26, 2010, 09:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Maryland
Posts: 893
A few years ago I had a JV coach at the end of the game yell to his players " foul him, FOUL HIM, FOUL HIM" and a kid ran from near foul line past the far foul line to push a kid into the first row of the stands.

I immediately called an flagrant foul and and tossed the kid. It was the coaches fault all the way, but there was no rule for the coach ( from what I knew ). I have no doubt the coach did not want the kid killed.

In this case I would connect the coach if there was a rule. But I agree, it would be used rarely.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 26, 2010, 09:46pm
Back from the DL
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Maine
Posts: 2,540
The theory behind the indirect technical foul, as I understand it, is that head coaches are responsible for the conduct of their respective benches. I don't know if that should extend to players.

If a player commits a flagrant foul, that player is disqualified. I say that's punishment enough. I don't think it's fair to hold the coach responsible.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 26, 2010, 10:36pm
Fav theme: Roundball Rock
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Near Dog River (sorta)
Posts: 8,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Padgett View Post
Idea for NF rule addition. Since coaches are responsible for the conduct of their players (in theory, anyway), what if a coach received an indirect technical whenever a player on that team was charged with a flagrant foul? I know it would have a fairly minor impact on the administration of the game, but it might make the coach take a greater interest in his or her responsibility for the behavior of their players. I'm not suggesting it happen for any technical or intentional, only flagrant technicals or personals. Just a thought.
I think it's a great idea.

A coach will think twice or three times about keeping/playing a loose cannon.
__________________
Pope Francis
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 26, 2010, 10:49pm
APG APG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by bktballref View Post
i don't think it happens often enough to be a concen. I don't think i've call 5 flagrant fouls in 20 years.
+1
__________________
Chaos isn't a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some, given a chance to climb, they refuse. They cling to the realm, or the gods, or love. Illusions.

Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is.

Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 26, 2010, 11:26pm
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by bainsey View Post
The theory behind the indirect technical foul, as I understand it, is that head coaches are responsible for the conduct of their respective benches. I don't know if that should extend to players.
They're all players, whether they're sitting on a bench or standing on the floor. Why shouldn't the coach be responsible for the conduct of them all? Besides, making this a rule would be symbolic - that's the point.
__________________
Yom HaShoah
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 26, 2010, 11:32pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Padgett View Post
They're all players, whether they're sitting on a bench or standing on the floor. Why shouldn't the coach be responsible for the conduct of them all? Besides, making this a rule would be symbolic - that's the point.
Actually, no. Players are the 5 team members in the game. The rest are bench personnel. But you know that. However, that's the point he's making. I tend to agree. Hard to control what some knucklehead is doing at the other end of the floor. Not all poor behavior comes with a red flag.

Just don't think it's necessary. My .
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott

"You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 27, 2010, 01:05am
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by BktBallRef View Post
I don't think it happens often enough to be a concen. I don't think I've call 5 flagrant fouls in 20 years.
+1

For that matter, I've never seen a coach ejected as a result of indirect technicals.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 27, 2010, 03:16pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: 3 hrs east of the western time zone
Posts: 895
Great Question.................................

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Padgett View Post
Idea for NF rule addition. Since coaches are responsible for the conduct of their players (in theory, anyway), what if a coach received an indirect technical whenever a player on that team was charged with a flagrant foul? I know it would have a fairly minor impact on the administration of the game, but it might make the coach take a greater interest in his or her responsibility for the behavior of their players. I'm not suggesting it happen for any technical or intentional, only flagrant technicals or personals. Just a thought.
When I first read this, I thought that you just had too much egg nog.

However - there are a lot of great points that have been argued.

I guess my only question is how much do we want to penalize a coach

because he has a couple of dumb asses on his team ??????
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 27, 2010, 03:59pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
+1

For that matter, I've never seen a coach ejected as a result of indirect technicals.
Coach ejections in my parts of the world have been rare. I've had two since 1987. The first was in a JV game in PA about 1991 -- I had called a direct technical in the first half and the coach followed me to the locker room at halftime. I called another technical and told him if he returned to the floor, I'd forfeit the game.

Second was in 1996 in a varsity game in TN -- Christian school coach who was very unChristian. Got a technical from my partner about 30 seconds into the game. Lasted until the second quarter when I called the second technical.

I will say that I probably should've had one last year. I chose talking the coach down from the ledge instead of pushing him off of it, and I'm not sure it was the right path for me to take.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 27, 2010, 04:54pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,955
Golden Parachute ???

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichMSN View Post
I chose talking the coach down from the ledge instead of pushing him off of it, and I'm not sure it was the right path for me to take.
Did the game get better after you talked him down? If so, then you did the right thing. If not? Then you learned a lesson, and next time you'll give him a little shove.
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

“I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36)
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 28, 2010, 12:15pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
Did the game get better after you talked him down? If so, then you did the right thing. If not? Then you learned a lesson, and next time you'll give him a little shove.
while I think that's a good rule of thumb for looking back, I don't think it can be seen as the only criteria for determining whether you made the right call. Sometimes, we call the T that needs called and the game still goes into the crapper. Others, perhaps Rich's example, we can avoid the necessary T and the game still stays manageable.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Perverts, New Laws and its impact scottk_61 Softball 25 Wed Jul 13, 2005 01:53pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:48pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1