And these discussions are wonderful. It gets us to think about what we would do and when it does happen we have some idea of what our thinking will be.

With all that being said, I cannot think of a single assignor I work for that would not be OK with me or any other official not calling a T for the "leaving the court" portion of the rule. As I said before, I can already realistically see a T for removing the jersey depending on when it took place. But to compound that with a T or any other very suspect penalty, I cannot see me using not using common sense. And I am also comfortable that my experience would be respected as well if I choose not to do so. And until the NF puts out a ruling or the IHSA puts out a ruling suggesting otherwise, I will not penalize such an action for a kid that is quitting the team even in a spectacular way.

Peace

Technically, I ejected him for unsporting behavior in the form of throwing equipment.

I just don't agree that we don't have rules covering a player refusing to play. We have a rule for not providing the free thrower. Use it.

Could you point me to the rule here so I can find it easier later?? Seems like this may be the most logical way to start the process.

In this situation, with any luck in our corner, the T would be the kid's 5th, and then he'd be disqualified, his sub would shoot, and away we go.

You just don't need all this. The rules weren't written to cover this situation, they were written to address sportsmanship issues. It's just not covered. Use 2-3, hell you can even call a T using 2-3 if you feel the need.

Just bring the sub in to shoot and play on.

Even in the dugout you are doing that? I know this is a different sport and I have not picked up a baseball rulebook in months, but I do not see any rules support if they do this outside of the field.

And I disagree with you that the rule applies to this situation at all. So we will just have to disagree on this.

Peace

Why? Coach is willing to provide one. There's no need to follow some legalistic rule gymnastics to get there when the rules weren't written for this situation.

The kid is no longer on the team, so use a shooter who is.

This is really, in the end, no different than a coach deciding to play with 4 because his 5th player is suspended.

We had a situation last weekend, H30 gets a T in the freshman game. Didn't play again and was taken out of the following JV game. If the coach had been down to 5 players, incluing 30, and he had told me at the time that #30 was suspended for getting the T, I would have allowed him to play with 4.

We don't decide who's on the team, the coach does.

8-1-2 clearly says, "Following a time-out or intermission....."

It never happens that cleanly. :)

Peace

Wow
 

There are sure some OOO's here.

T

Tee must've noticed the baseball reference. :D

+1 :d

I was wondering when someone was going to say this. :)

Peace

It's A Violation, Not A Technical Foul ???
 

9-3-3: A player shall not leave the court for an unauthorized reason.

Here's a technical foul reference that won't work:

10-3-2: A player shall not: Purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds.

This will work:

10-3-5: A player shall not: Delay the game by acts such as:
a. Preventing the ball from being made live promptly or from being put inplay.
c. The free thrower fails to be in the free-throw semicircle when the official is ready to administer the free throw unless the resumption-of-play procedure is in effect following a time-out or intermission.

So will this:

10-3-6: A player shall not:
h. Removing the jersey and/or pants/skirt within the visual confines of the playing area.
i. Leave the playing court for an unauthorized reason to demonstrate resentment, disgust or intimidation.

Pick your poison.

So the best answer is two technicals to the player if necessary for ejection, foul shots by the sub with the lanes cleared, then 4 free throws by the other team with the lanes cleared and then ball at mid court. Sound about right?

Two technicals are not necessary for ejection.

And ejection is not necessary for the situation.

Just charge the kid with a flagrant T which would cause an automatic ejection and you won't have to worry about whether he should be forced to shoot his free throws. :cool: