fight rule

[deecee]

We were always taught in my previous area that each set are treated completely different.

The players on court fighting is one set.
Players leaving and not fighting is another.
Players leaving and fighting is another.

This way we track 3 sets of T's and administer each accordingly as in which ever team has an uneven number for each set shoots.

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by deecee

We were always taught in my previous area that each set are treated completely different.

The players on court fighting is one set.
Players leaving and not fighting is another.
Players leaving and fighting is another.

This way we track 3 sets of T's and administer each accordingly as in which ever team has an uneven number for each set shoots.

Can you then have FT's at each end? I like the idea of "you should never shoot FT's at both ends of the court" I'm an accountant and that way I get to add up the FT's awarded, cancel out and only administer the remainder. Then draw a double line under my totals and call it balanced!

A confusing issue is that all T's (concerning bench personnel) are not necessarily awarded FT's. (penalties 10-8) By that nature, I don't think it is as easy as adding up the T's or players and then calculating FT's.

I completely agree that each "set" mentioned above are treated differently. But I don't think the rule is written that simply. There is still the application of indirects appiled to HC. I am not sure that "whichever team has an uneven number . . . shoots" is correct.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by deecee

We were always taught in my previous area that each set are treated completely different.

The players on court fighting is one set.
Players leaving and not fighting is another.
Players leaving and fighting is another.

This way we track 3 sets of T's and administer each accordingly as in which ever team has an uneven number for each set shoots.

So then which would you shoot first? Who gets the ball?

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by Adam

Who gets the ball?

BillyMac's handout explains things pretty well. But . . . the idea of "AP unless there is Team Control" as the answer to whom gets possession is worded poorly. As I undertand it, it is always POI. If there is no definitive POI, AP is the correct choice. As I've heard it said many times before, AP is almost never the right answer.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Adam

So then which would you shoot first? Who gets the ball?

we would shoot the team that wasnt going to be getting the ball first. and the team that got the ball would be whichever team had fewer total T's.

I like the no shooting on both sides much better.

[ronny mulkey]

Another debated topic is that GHSA advises officials to not separate the players - "don't grab the players" once the melee starts. Does your association or State have different advise on this topic?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by ronny mulkey

Another debated topic is that GHSA advises officials to not separate the players - "don't grab the players" once the melee starts. Does your association or State have different advise on this topic?

I have never been told to separate players. Ever.

Once they engage, just take numbers.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by ronny mulkey

Another debated topic is that GHSA advises officials to not separate the players - "don't grab the players" once the melee starts. Does your association or State have different advise on this topic?

Same here. If you are close enough to get in between before anything starts then try and keep them apart. But if they are going at it just sit back and record what happens. If you are close to the table and have the ability to quickly get a pen and paper that could help a lot (but it should be done extremely quick).

Any coaches and personnel trying to break up the fight are considered beckoned on the court. Also I would not if you or your partner can then remind benches to keep their personnel on the bench. usually at the varsity level (for a majority of schools I have worked) there will be one or two coaches that initially make sure the bench stays where they belong.

[Adam]

Let's mix it up a bit.

Fight begins with a live ball Flagrant personal foul by B1.

After he gets up, A1 punches B1. A2 then shoves B1. A6, A7, and B8 come off the bench and fight. B12 comes off the bench.but doesn't fight.

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by Adam

Let's mix it up a bit.

Fight begins with a live ball Flagrant personal foul by B1.

After he gets up, A1 punches B1. A2 then shoves B1. A6, A7, and B8 come off the bench and fight. B12 comes off the bench.but doesn't fight.

All ejected.

2 FT's awarded to Team B

Coach A gets 2 Indirects
Coach B gets 1 Indirect

Team B gets ball at the division line.

Add 4 fouls to team A's count and 3 fouls to team B's count.

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

All ejected.

2 FT's awarded to Team B

Coach A gets 2 Indirects
Coach B gets 1 Indirect

Team B gets ball at the division line.

Add 4 fouls to team A's count and 3 fouls to team B's count.

I agree with all this except coach B is going to get 2 indirect. 1 for B8 leaving and fighting and 1 for B12 leaving but not fighting.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Adam

Let's mix it up a bit.

Fight begins with a live ball Flagrant personal foul by B1.

After he gets up, A1 punches B1. A2 then shoves B1. A6, A7, and B8 come off the bench and fight. B12 comes off the bench.but doesn't fight.

It depends on whether you view this as one incident or two (and maybe on whether you think a "personal" for fighting can offset a "technical" for fighting.)

The bench stuff all offsets.

So, if you view it as one event, then it's two flagrants on A and one on B, so B shoots 2 FTs and gets the ball.

If you view it as separate events, the A shoots 2 FTs, B shoots 4 FTs and gets the ball.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

It depends on whether you view this as one incident or two (and maybe on whether you think a "personal" for fighting can offset a "technical" for fighting.)

The flagrant personal foul by B1 cannot be offset by any technical foul. There is no rule provision which would allow for that.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The flagrant personal foul by B1 cannot be offset by any technical foul. There is no rule provision which would allow for that.

If the flagrant foul which starts the action is what provokes that which follows, why could it not be called a technical foul as well?

[Scratch85]

I believe coach B would also get 2 indirects now that I am looking at it again. One for players leaving the bench and one for B8 participating in the fight.