Technical Fouls???

[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.

[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.

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

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.

I have worked with a guy that didn't pass the open book test, he was passed due to a shortage of officials. I have heard of guys that didn't pass the test as well.

To acquire the classification to do varsity is closed book and a mechanics test. No mechanics test required for first years though.( the aforementioned guy wouldn't of passed that either.

[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.

[tref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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.

Whoa! I dont want to work in those states.

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by tref

Bingo! This pertains to the original sitch you posted.






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

Suspect away I guess...

Again I understand my first post was incorrect. My line of thinking was that the disqualified player was bench personnel which the HC is ultimately responsible for and therefore would be given an indirect T. Since then I have learned (which is the reason we having these discussions) that it is actually a direct T. I greatly appreciate the poster who posted the applicable rule earlier in this conversation.

Now if you want to sit here and argue that the above is what you consider "basic knowledge" that's fine I guess, but it's something we are going to have to disagree about. I've worked roughly 40 official dates a year (most of which are double headers) including two full seasons of varsity assignments as part of a 3 man crew, and a little bit of D3 college JV action and I have yet to encounter this situation, or anything remotely close to it occurring. That doesn't include the multiple officials camps and youth tournaments in which I frequently work 5-8 games per date. I'm aware that pales to the experience some of you likely have but that doesn't change the fact that I haven't seen it in three years, and therefore I don't consider that something "basic". I'm thankful I'm learning the finer points about my avocation here as opposed to on the court after I've screwed them up.

Lastly I'm glad you have, and are confident in, a solid foundation of rulebook knowledge. That's a great thing to have as strength. One of my partners also has an encyclopedic knowledge of the book, and he pulls our *** out of the fire once or twice a year. My personal strength is in game management and comes from my background of 12 years as a player (10 years as a youth and HS standout and 2 years as a division 2 benchwarmer) and 13 years as a coach. Personally there is no greater comfort than knowing there is no behavior that goes on in game, either on the floor or on the bench, which I can't handle. That's something that can't be learned from a rule book.

Rulebook knowledge is a tremendous asset, but it’s not the only asset, and it alone doesn’t make you a great official. Please understand I am in no way implying that you don’t also have game management skills.

[SNIPERBBB]

I hope you have also learned under the OP that there shouldn't of been a T to start with.

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

I hope you have also learned under the OP that there shouldn't of been a T to start with.

Absolutely. I was also shocked to learn that if the player attempts to re-enter after being disqualified that it was up to the discretion of the officials on whether to access a T at all.

[tref]

Originally Posted by Duffman

Suspect away I guess...

Again I understand my first post was incorrect. My line of thinking was that the disqualified player was bench personnel which the HC is ultimately responsible for and therefore would be given an indirect T. Since then I have learned (which is the reason we having these discussions) that it is actually a direct T. I greatly appreciate the poster who posted the applicable rule earlier in this conversation.

Do you know WHY its direct to him?
If a teammember on the bench calls you a frickin idiot, what type of T is that?

Originally Posted by Duffman

Now if you want to sit here and argue that the above is what you consider "basic knowledge" that's fine I guess, but it's something we are going to have to disagree about. I've worked roughly 40 official dates a year (most of which are double headers) including two full seasons of varsity assignments as part of a 3 man crew, and a little bit of D3 college JV action and I have yet to encounter this situation, or anything remotely close to it occurring. That doesn't include the multiple officials camps and youth tournaments in which I frequently work 5-8 games per date.

Guess we'll have to disagree then, big time! You must live in SoCal

Originally Posted by Duffman

Rulebook knowledge is a tremendous asset, but it’s not the only asset, and it alone doesn’t make you a great official. Please understand I am in no way implying that you don’t also have game management skills.

Not only is it "tremendous" it is also the FOUNDATION which everything else is built upon!! I agree, I've worked with some guys that know their rules but still cant call Lassie.

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by tref

Do you know WHY its direct to him?
If a teammember on the bench calls you a frickin idiot, what type of T is that?

An uneccesary one?

[7IronRef]

Originally Posted by Duffman

Suspect away I guess...
One of my partners also has an encyclopedic knowledge of the book, and he pulls our *** out of the fire once or twice a year. My personal strength is in game management and comes from my background of 12 years as a player (10 years as a youth and HS standout and 2 years as a division 2 benchwarmer) and 13 years as a coach. Personally there is no greater comfort than knowing there is no behavior that goes on in game, either on the floor or on the bench, which I can't handle. That's something that can't be learned from a rule book.

Rulebook knowledge is a tremendous asset, but it’s not the only asset, and it alone doesn’t make you a great official. Please understand I am in no way implying that you don’t also have game management skills.

Would you rather be known as the guy that can save a crew with a thorough knowledge of the rule book, or would you rather be known as the guy who doesn't know the requirements of TF situations. These have harsh penalties to the players and coaches involved, they are even more harsh for a crew that misspplies them.

If you are getting the games you say you are, you will eventually be the CC of a game, and you will eventually work with officials that will let you handle all the "hard" stuff because you are the CC. Improper rules application, especially when you are expected to KNOW the rules, is not always well received. It makes the crew look bad and in turn makes the assignor look bad.

No one can force you to read the books....but you will soon be discovered if you don't

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Duffman

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)

There's no conflict when you understand when it is a player becomes bench personnel.