fight rule

[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?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

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?

If i remember correctly, there's some ambiguity in the rules here.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Adam

If i remember correctly, there's some ambiguity in the rules here.

So that means I'm right?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Adam

If i remember correctly, there's some ambiguity in the rules here.

Yes, there is.

In one place, in very plain language, it says that fighting is a technical foul without mention of the status of the ball (live/dead).

Elsewhere, it says that live ball contact is a personal foul.


I'm of the opinion that the fighting rule, being the more special situation, should supersede the more general live ball/personal rule. But, not all agree.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

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?

A personal foul can NEVER become a technical foul and a technical foul can NEVER become a personal foul. They are two mutually exclusive categories.

What can happen is that an unsporting act (by definition a noncontact technical foul) can be deemed fighting if it causes the opponent to retaliate by doing so, and thus becomes a flagrant technical foul.
However, it was already a technical foul. The penalty just now includes a disqualification. That is per the definition of fighting in rule 4.

[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.