![]() |
Ejections after Cal-Stanford scrap highlight need for a rule change
Quote:
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/IdVNc0FDlbQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> |
If coaches act like adults than this would not be an issue in the first place. I do not see a need for a rules change. The coaches should have stayed on the benches plain and simple. All those people do is help escalate the situation as people are grabbing them and more people to say something to add to an already volatile situation.
Peace |
I disagree...assuming assistant coaches are acting as peacemakers, they almost always help the situation IMO...the NBA has this rule right in that head and assistant coaches can come onto the court acting as peacemakers.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Being ejected as an assistant is a miniscule price to pay. |
Quote:
Peace |
Quote:
Still, since coaches great input on the rules, I wouldn't be surprised to see this rule altered. |
Put my on Jeff's side of this one. 5x5 on the court, 2 of them pissed, USUALLY at least one of each side is helping break things up. At worst, you have 8 people to watch.
Add a coach and 2 assistants and suddenly the "pile" is twice as large, with twice as many arms and elbows. Intentions aside, this sudden 14 person pileup becomes much harder to manage. Add to this that in general, my experience with ***. coaches is that they live up to their abbreviations and are more hotheaded than some players. |
Quote:
Peace |
So if you pause it during the "height" of the confrontation, there are 10 Coaches in suits on the court in the middle of the players...so why are only 3 of them being disciplined?
|
Also in the ND/St Johns, situation, there's an assistant coach that's off the bench and gets involved. Don't believe he was ejected from the game. And honestly, I bet if we went back and watched films of altercations or potential altercations, that more assistant coaches, by strict interpretation of the rule, should be ejected, yet aren't.
|
I'm with JRut. More people out there creates a chance for more chaos. Leave the rule the way it is and let the individual conferences deal with the discipline. Most games at all NCAA levels have cameras in the building, whether they're on ESPN or the internet. If they were being peacemakers they'll be back on the bench the next game because their conference commissioners will be able to see what happened.
Quote:
|
Hopefully they ejected Cal #35 for coming off the bench as well. As far as ejecting the assistant coaches, I think I'm with Jeff on this one, way too many folks out there.
|
I think the rule should be changed...there's already a mechanism to punish those who are exacerbating the situation. True peacemakers shouldn't be punished for a good deed because others are rats. Hold them to a strict standard; even a HINT of not helping and they're gone. But if they're truly helping - well, that's their role IMO.
|
I understand the reasoning as to why you would want to allow assistant coaches to come off of the court in this situation, but I still believe that they need to stay on the bench in these situations. When chaos occurs (i.e. a fight), less is more. There will always be players who are involved in the altercation, and there will always be players who are trying to break up the altercation.
Assistant coaches are bench personnel, and they should remain to be bench personnel when a fight situation occurs. The more people you allow to come onto the court in these situations, the more problems you could potentially have. All in all, I think the assistant coaches did the right thing in this situation, and, like was said earlier, an ejection is a small price to pay to calm the situation at hand. They still need to be restricted to the bench in those situations though. |
Leave the rule the way it is and give the officials the flexibility to look at replay to determine whether the assistants were peacemakers and helpful or not. In this case they were and they should not have been ejected.
Years ago, we ran through this in a chapter meeting -- a simulated fight -- and talked about as a mock crew how to handle it. It was quickly decided that the coaches who came on the floor to get their own players off were deemed to have been "beckoned" on the court by the officials, even if retroactively. Now, if an assistant is exacerbating trouble or can't keep their own players on the bench, use the rule to inflict appropriate penalties. The Cal player who started this needs to be suspended for more than just a game. He flopped and retaliated for nothing. Cal was clearly looking for an excuse to start something and this needs to be dealt with severely by the conference and the NCAA. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
If you allow assistant coaches to come off the bench to pull players apart, what is to stop a player from coming off the bench even to do the same thing? When a fight breaks out it is usually a maximum of 4 players. That means there are another 9 people (6 players, 3 officials) on the court who can work to separate the combatants. In my mind, a player or coach coming from the bench is more likely to aggravate the situation than help it.
|
If the rule allowed assistant coaches to help, players would still be prevented. They aren't stupid.
|
This makes no sense. Let's assume all 10 players on the court are going at it. How in the heck are 2 people (one HC from each side) supposed to stop this? Also why are we assuming that the players will listen any more to the HC than an AC in these types of situations. I think the rule should be changed.
BTW what is to happen to any security personnel that help break up the fracas? Are we to have them shackled and sent to the dungeons? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Agreed, adds to the chaos Can you say Jeff Van Gundy. Every fight you ever can visualize has the 'suits' flaying around, Joseph A. Banks ties a flyin' |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:44pm. |