Technical Fouls???

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I don't want to come across too harsh, but you should really spend some time in the rule book. If you're going to toss a coach, it would be a good idea to know why.

+1.

Read more. Post less.

[Duffman]

All I was trying to say is that the previous poster had the correct answer, while also trying to answer what I believed to be the spirit of the question, which was "Is the HC responsible for bench personell".

Sorry if my answer confused or irritated anyone.

I'm also now aware that if the HC had been notified, and the player somehow remained in, or re-entered the game at a later point that is a direct T not indirect. Learning things is good, regardless of it whether or not it comes from reading the rule book or participating in on-line rules discussion.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Duffman

All I was trying to say is that the previous poster had the correct answer, while also trying to answer what I believed to be the spirit of the question, which was "Is the HC responsible for bench personell".

Sorry if my answer confused or irritated anyone.
...

It's not irritating b/c you were wrong, it's irritating b/c you posted it without any real rules basis?

There is a difference between being wrong b/c you are misinterpreting or being confused by a rule and being wrong b/c you are just guessing and don't really know the answer.

[tref]

Originally Posted by Duffman

Learning things is good, regardless of it whether or not it comes from reading the rule book or participating in on-line rules discussion.

Cant say that I agree with this in its entirety. We should get our noses in the book to learn the basics at the very least. Backing up that knowledge by plugging into the Forum is supplemental... or at least it should be. JMO

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by tref

Cant say that I agree with this in its entirety. We should get our noses in the book to learn the basics at the very least. Backing up that knowledge by plugging into the Forum is supplemental... or at least it should be. JMO

I agree whole heartedly with most of this. I guess I disagree that knowing wether or not a bench player illegally entering and playing in a game after he's been disqualified is a direct t or an indirect t is "basic".

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Duffman

I agree whole heartedly with most of this. I guess I disagree that knowing wether or not a bench player illegally entering and playing in a game after he's been disqualified is a direct t or an indirect t is "basic".

IMO, when you look it up yourself, you (a) learn it better and (b) often find other things that you didn't know.

If you look it up and the question is phrased in the form of "rule 1 says this but rule 2 seems to imply that, which is true?" then I have a lot more respect for the question.

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

IMO, when you look it up yourself, you (a) learn it better and (b) often find other things that you didn't know.

If you look it up and the question is phrased in the form of "rule 1 says this but rule 2 seems to imply that, which is true?" then I have a lot more respect for the question.

Fair enough.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

If you look it up and the question is phrased in the form of "rule 1 says this but rule 2 seems to imply that, which is true?" then I have a lot more respect for the question.

I'm open to more different kinds of questions. Sometimes answers appear in strange places in the book, and it's not obvious how to find them. Or people think in coach-speak and can't find "over the back" in the book.

[tref]

Originally Posted by Duffman

I agree whole heartedly with most of this. I guess I disagree that knowing wether or not a bench player illegally entering and playing in a game after he's been disqualified is a direct t or an indirect t is "basic".

Coaches are responsible for their bench personel, correct?
A T to the bench is indirectly assessed to the coach, correct?
A DQd player becomes bench personel when the coach is notified, correct?

Originally Posted by djtraver

Coach receives a technical foul early in the game. Later, a player commits his 5th foul and is permitted to continue play. Once the books notice the problem, player is deemed disqualified. A technical was assessed to the book.

Question is, does the technical go towards the coach as his second? It was called as a technical on the book and the coach was not disqualified.

Sorry but these are basic principles.

Personally, there is no more comfortable feeling than knowing there is nothing that can happen on the court that I cant handle.
Not that I know all the rules, but I aspire to...

Question 4 you: Have you taken & passed the exam in your State?

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by tref

Coaches are responsible for their bench personel, correct?
A T to the bench is indirectly assessed to the coach, correct?
A DQd player becomes bench personel when the coach is notified, correct?



Sorry but these are basic principles.

That is exactly what I believed to be correct, however it seems to conflict with this...

10.5.3 SITUATION:

A5 has just received his/her fifth foul of the game. A5 (a) is erroneously permitted to remain in the game for another two minutes before the scorer realizes the mistake; or (b) leaves the game after the coach is notified of the disqualification. At the intermission between the third and fourth quarter, A5 reports as a substitute and subsequently enters the game.

RULING: In (a), as soon as the error is discovered, the player is removed from the game, no penalties are assessed. In (b), A5 will not actually "participate" until the ball becomes live. If detected prior to the ball becoming live, A5 would be directed to the bench and no penalty assessed unless the official deemed it was a deliberate attempt to circumvent the rules. If detected after the ball becomes live, it is a technical foul charged directly to the head coach resulting in the loss of coaching-box privileges. The player is immediately removed from the game and Team B is awarded two free throws and the ball. (2-11-5 Note 2)

[Duffman]

And yes I have. Our state requires an open book test which I have taken and passed in each of the last 3 years.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I'm open to more different kinds of questions. Sometimes answers appear in strange places in the book, and it's not obvious how to find them. Or people think in coach-speak and can't find "over the back" in the book.

I agree, and didn't mean my example to be limiting. But, when the question can be answered directly from the book, as in:

10-5-3 The head coach shall not permit a team member to participate after being removed from the game for disqualification. PENALTY: The foul is charged directly to the head coach.

then I get a little peeved, especially when several hints have been given in the thread.

[tref]

Bingo! This pertains to the original sitch you posted.

Originally Posted by Duffman

10.5.3 SITUATION:

A5 has just received his/her fifth foul of the game. A5 (a) is erroneously permitted to remain in the game for another two minutes before the scorer realizes the mistake
RULING: In (a), as soon as the error is discovered, the player is removed from the game, no penalties are assessed.

Originally Posted by Duffman

And yes I have. Our state requires an open book test which I have taken and passed in each of the last 3 years.

An open book test, even the 1st time? Thats quite suspect...

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by tref

Bingo! This pertains to the original sitch you posted.






An open book test, even the 1st time? Thats quite suspect...

Huh? I would think that (almost) anyone could pass (assuming that's 70% or so) an open book test even if they had never officiated before.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tref

An open book test, even the 1st time? Thats quite suspect...

Some states allow an open book test to suffice for a set number of years for new officials; but those officials don't tend to get varsity schedules.