Is there such an animal as a False Multiple Technical?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

If anybody hollers at you that a team has 6 on the floor, would anybody with even the tinest amount of experience and rules knowledge not count the players before blowing his whistle? Any putz that doesn't is walking on thin ice imo.

I'm thinking the guy mentioned above is gonna indicate that he did count before the whistle, whether he actually did so or not. If he then counts again, ostensibly to double check, I really don't see how anybody could complain.

[BillyMac]

It's not a mechanics question.

[M&M Guy]

Billy, maybe try to look at this way - let's say there's 3 subs for each team waiting at the table, and there's a violation that stops play. You wave on the subs, and they come on the floor. Well, look at that! Holy crap! There's a dead ball, and there's, what, 15 or 16 people on the floor! T's for everyone! Get all the cheaters outta here!

Ok, maybe that's a little over the top. But there are many instances where there are more than 5 for each team on the floor during a dead ball, and none of them need to be penalized. If you're good at analyzing, tell me this - when you beckon a sub on the court, they become a player. If the player being subbed for doesn't know they need to come out, and we hold up play waiting for someone to go out, don't we have, officially, 6 "players" on the court? T, right? Of course not, the T is when they are "participating" (live ball).

We already have other instances in the rules where things must be penalized or fixed when they happen, and if not, then it's too late. This happens to be another one of those instances. A correctable error cannot be corrected past the allowable time in the rules, no matter how much we know, after the fact, that it should. A T cannot be issued after the fact, no matter how much we know there are 6 players on the floor after we blow the whistle to stop play; we need to know it before that (while it's happening).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Holy crap! There's a dead ball, and there's, what, 15 or 16 people on the floor! T's for everyone! Get all the cheaters outta here! OK, maybe that's a little over the top. But there are many instances where there are more than 5 for each team on the floor during a dead ball, and none of them need to be penalized.

It's not over the top. Sometimes one needs to look at extremes to really understand something. I know that some of the situations that I posted were extreme.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

A T cannot be issued after the fact, no matter how much we know there are 6 players on the floor after we blow the whistle to stop play; we need to know it before that (while it's happening).

Nice reply. Thanks.

Here's what I've got from this thread (same as Jurassic Referee posted a week ago):

If more than five team members are participating, then the team can be charged with a technical foul during all live ball situations, as well as during all dead ball, clock running, situations.

If more than five team members are "participating" during a clock stopped, dead ball, situation then then the team cannot be charged with a technical foul.

I wish that the NFHS was more definitive about what "participating" means, as well as what "while being violated" means.

I'm still having problems accepting these situations:

Head coach of Team B requests, and is granted, a timeout. The sole purpose of this timeout is to call attention to the officials that Team A has six team members participating. Officials, who have been unaware that six team members have been participating up until that point, count six team members on the court. Dead ball. Clock stopped. Too late to penalize.

Team A has six team members participating, which goes unobserved by the officials. Official calls a travel violation on Team A. There are no substitutions after the whistle. Before administering the throw in, official observes that Team A has six team members participating. Dead ball. Clock stopped. Too late to penalize.

Team A has six players on the court. Officials are unaware of this infraction. Team A has been awarded two free throws. First free throw is successful. No substitutions are made. Before bouncing the ball to the free thrower for his second free throw, the officials realize that Team A has six players on the court. Dead ball. Clock stopped. Too late to penalize.

In all three situations, I know that I'm going to have a difficult time explaining to the head coach of Team B that it's too late to penalize, especially the first situation.

Bottom line. Officials must take their time, and do everything that they can possibly do, using good mechanics, to prevent this from happening.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Bottom line. Officials must take their time, and do everything that they can possibly do, using good mechanics, to prevent this from happening.

Exactly. Now, to get on my soapbox a little, I still don't like the fact that many will say it's our fault if we don't count and discover it. We do what we can to try and prevent it, but it's just as much, if not more, the coach's fault. They are the ones directly involved with their team, who subs in at what time, who they're replacing, etc. If there are 6 players participating, and the coach doesn't catch it or is aware of it, then they deserve the T. More than likely, they are aware of it and are simply trying to get away with something if we don't catch it, so even more of a reason to assess the T in my mind.

Maybe another way to look at the plays you're having problems with is to use JR's reasoning - if it's a point in the game where a sub can enter, can you be 100% absolutely positively sure that a sub didn't come in when you weren't looking? I think that's why the rules makers want it to be discovered while violating, iow, while the game is going on. That's where the real advantage happens, not when players are standing around, or moving to the next throw-in spot, etc.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Not when players are standing around, or moving to the next throw-in spot, etc.

Good point. Advantage. Disadvantage. What a novel idea?

[just another ref]

Put this one under rule change I would like to see.


Penalized with definite knowledge the infraction occurred.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I'm thinking the guy mentioned above is gonna indicate that he did count before the whistle, whether he actually did so or not. If he then counts again, ostensibly to double check, I really don't see how anybody could complain.

So you're saying that anyone with poor mechanics is likely to have poor ethics as well?