Fight in girls game - sort of

[Mark Padgett]

Had two games last night, first one was a 6th grade "competitive" girls game. Visitors were getting splooched the entire game. Home team had a girl who was relatively tall and she pretty much controlled the game on both ends.

Middle of Q3, one of the visiting girls was guarding the tall girl who was posting up and when she received the ball, the defender just pushed her really hard in the small of the back. I was lead and blew the whistle immediately for the intentional. I didn't think it warranted a flagrant. The tall girl, much to her credit, just turned around and tossed the ball to me. The defender said something to the tall girl (I couldn't hear it) and the tall girl slapped her right across the face! Both teams and their coaches ran off the bench but everyone just kind of stood there, thank goodness. My partner and I broke it up quickly and everyone settled down.

We sorted things out by ejecting the tall girl for the slap, giving each team a bench technical (we thought that was "even"), shooting all the free throws and then getting on with the game. If I had heard the defender use profanity or something similar, I would have taken action against her, but because I didn't hear what she said, I really felt I couldn't do anything specific. There were no more incidents. BTW - the home team won by 35.

[tref]

Could the INT personal or the defenders words (even though you didnt hear them) have lead to the footers flagrant actions?

Perhaps the defender should've been tossed as well? IJS since were talking "even" (fair) and all.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by tref

Could the INT personal or the defenders words (even though you didnt hear them) have lead to the footers flagrant actions?

Perhaps the defender should've been tossed as well? IJS since were talking "even" (fair) and all.

She might have said something as innocent as "Your boyfriend's a dork".

[tref]

Your boyfriend's a dork... Nice no call! lol

Let say:

B1 shoves A1 in the back while airborne for an open court layup. A1 gets up & punches B1. A1 is charged with a flagrant T & B1s intentional personal is what instigated it.

We're tossing B1 as well, correct?

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by tref

Your boyfriend's a dork... Nice no call! lol

Let say:

B1 shoves A1 in the back while airborne for an open court layup. A1 gets up & punches B1. A1 is charged with a flagrant T & B1s intentional personal is what instigated it.

We're tossing B1 as well, correct?

Really? I don't grade the severity of a foul based on the emotional reaction of the one who got fouled after the physical consequence of the foul has ended.

[VaTerp]

If the "tall" girl's initial reaction was just to toss you the ball and did not escalate until the defender said something to her AFTER the defender had already committed an intentional foul by pushing her in the back, then I don't have to hear what she said. Both are getting tossed. Or at the least, the defender is also getting a T to go along with her intentional.

[Da Official]

Originally Posted by vaterp

if the "tall" girl's initial reaction was just to toss you the ball and did not escalate until the defender said something to her after the defender had already committed an intentional foul by pushing her in the back, then i don't have to hear what she said. Both are getting tossed. Or at the least, the defender is also getting a t to go along with her intentional.

+1

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by tref

Your boyfriend's a dork... Nice no call! lol

Let say:

B1 shoves A1 in the back while airborne for an open court layup. A1 gets up & punches B1. A1 is charged with a flagrant T & B1s intentional personal is what instigated it.

We're tossing B1 as well, correct?

No.

And, if you do, then B1's IP is really an FP.

[tref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

No.

And, if you do, then B1's IP is really an FP.

I guess I'm reading 4-18-2 wrong then...

[Loudwhistle]

Originally Posted by tref

Your boyfriend's a dork... Nice no call! lol

Let say:

B1 shoves A1 in the back while airborne for an open court layup. A1 gets up & punches B1. A1 is charged with a flagrant T & B1s intentional personal is what instigated it.

We're tossing B1 as well, correct?

No, An intentional personal foul was called here on B1 not a flagrant. Now if there is verbal taunting from B1 then ejecting B1 is a possibility.

[tref]

Got it! The one & only caseplay for this situation is verbal taunting during a dead ball which lead to a punch, so both are ruled flagrant.

INTs which lead to a fight cannot be upgraded.
Thanks!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Both teams and their coaches ran off the bench but everyone just kind of stood there, thank goodness. My partner and I broke it up quickly and everyone settled down.

We sorted things out by ejecting the tall girl for the slap, giving each team a bench technical (we thought that was "even"), shooting all the free throws and then getting on with the game.

Even though this was a sixth grade competitive game rather than a sixth grade non-competitive game, I probably would have handled it it the same way.

By rule though, everybody who came out on the court including any of the coaches should have been given flagrant technical fouls and disqualified. The head coaches each get charged with an indirect "T". If the same number on each team leave the bench, there's no free throws and we go to the POI. If one team has more people leave the bench, the other team gets a maximum of 2 free throws and the ball at the division line for a throw-in.

NFHS rule 10 PENALTIES: (Rule 10 summary) #8b(1) if anyone cares..

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Even though this was a sixth grade competitive game rather than a sixth grade non-competitive game, I probably would have handled it it the same way.

Let me explain the terminology. Around here, there are two "types" of kids programs (except for a very few school MS leagues). They are usually referred to as "competitive" and "recreational". In fact, the "official" name of some of the leagues include the word "competitive" in their titles. While the teams in the recreational organizations certainly try to win their games, their emphasis is on having fun, learning the game and practicing good sportsmanship. Most of the kids in the competitive groups are the better players (or kids whose parents think they're better players ) and their parents are willing to pay much, much more in registration and uniform fees, plus there's quite a bit of travel around the Metro area. The competitive programs started up about 10 years ago. Prior to that, all kids played in the same programs and there was much more disparity between the playing skills of the players.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Let me explain the terminology. Around here, there are two "types" of kids programs (except for a very few school MS leagues). They are usually referred to as "competitive" and "recreational". In fact, the "official" name of some of the leagues include the word "competitive" in their titles. While the teams in the recreational organizations certainly try to win their games, their emphasis is on having fun, learning the game and practicing good sportsmanship. Most of the kids in the competitive groups are the better players (or kids whose parents think they're better players ) and their parents are willing to pay much, much more in registration and uniform fees, plus there's quite a bit of travel around the Metro area. The competitive programs started up about 10 years ago. Prior to that, all kids played in the same programs and there was much more disparity between the playing skills of the players.

And let me explain my thinking.

All sixth grade age and under games are recreational or should be imo. The people that want to label them "competitive" are taking themselves way too seriously. We run into them all the time here during local club tournaments. They all think their 10 year old are playing in the NBA finals.

There's nothing the matter with trying to have the kids play within the skill level they have at a particular time of their development, but the individual skill levels can change real quickly when they're that age. But no matter what, the focus of the coaches should be to (1) let the kids have fun (2)impart some life lessons, and (3) increase individual skills. Winning games should come in around 4323rd place at that age.

Hell, even Calipari doesn't offer the kids scholarships until they're in the seventh grade.

But that's just me generally on all kids sports, Mark, at that age.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

All sixth grade age and under games are recreational or should be imo. The people that want to label them "competitive" are taking themselves way too seriously. We run into them all the time here during local club tournaments. They all think their 10 year old are playing in the NBA finals.

Certainly, I agree, but around here the competitive groups start at 5th grade for both boys and girls. There's nothing I can do about it except make sure our local kids rec league (of which I am a Board member) acts in the "correct" manner for that age level, which it does. In fact, we start at 3rd grade.

BTW - some of the "competitive" teams actually hire coaches - former college players, etc. I've seen that practice go as low as 6th grade. Unbelievable.