Ejections after Cal-Stanford scrap highlight need for a rule change

[APG]

Y! SPORTS

At the end of a skirmish late in the second half of Wednesday night's Pac-12 rivalry game between Cal and Stanford, referees reviewed the incident on a monitor and made a ruling that caught most viewers by surprise.

They ejected assistant coaches who sprinted off their respective benches to separate the players involved and ensure the scuffle didn't escalate further.

Tempers boiled over with about five five minutes remaining in Stanford's 83-70 road victory when there was a scramble for a loose ball and Cardinal forward Dwight Powell caught Cal's Allen Crabbe in the chest with an elbow. After appearing to flop in hopes of drawing a flagrant foul, Crabbe then got up and ran at Powell, igniting a shoving match that resulted in no punches thrown but two players and three assistant coaches being ejected for leaving the bench.

The irony of Cal assistant Gregg Gottlieb and Stanford assistants Charles Payne and Mark Madsen being tossed is all three did a great job pulling players away from each other in order to make sure a full-fledged brawl didn't ensue. Coaches on both sides surely knew that a punch could result in at least a one-game suspension for the offending player, something neither side could afford with no games left prior to the start of the Pac-12 tournament.

By rule, the referees acted appropriately ejecting the three assistants because the NCAA rulebook states that only "the head coach may leave the bench area in this case to prevent the situation from escalating." That's probably something the rules committee may want to address because in this case the assistants acted in a way that benefited both their teams and the game.

[JRutledge]

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

[APG]

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.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by APG

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.

That is a delicate balance. Just look at this situation compared Notre Dame-St.Johns situation. I did not see the situation calming down very quickly in this game compared to a few days ago. It even seem this situation between Cal-Stanford went on too long. There were as many coaches on the court as players and I honestly cannot think in that chaos that officials can always tell who is who and adjudicate the right things in the situation. At least players are in uniforms and Head Coach is usually very easy to identify. Assistants in suits are not necessarily easy to spot who is on what team.

Peace

[APG]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

That is a delicate balance. Just look at this situation compared Notre Dame-St.Johns situation. I did not see the situation calming down very quickly in this game compared to a few days ago. It even seem this situation between Cal-Stanford went on too long. There were as many coaches on the court as players and I honestly cannot think in that chaos that officials can always tell who is who and adjudicate the right things in the situation. At least players are in uniforms and Head Coach is usually very easy to identify. Assistants in suits are not necessarily easy to spot who is on what team.

Peace

Well at this level, they have replay, so that would make for easy identification...but I do agree it would harder in games w/o the use of replay. And also, in NBA games, not all assistants are going onto the court...usually its 2-3 of their job to make sure no one leaves the vicinity of the bench, because unlike NFHS/NCAA, while it's not an in-game penalty for just leaving the bench area during an altercation, it is an automatic one game fine and the league is real strict about this (just ask Amar'e about this).

Still, since coaches great input on the rules, I wouldn't be surprised to see this rule altered.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by APG

Well at this level, they have replay, so that would make for easy identification...but I do agree it would harder in games w/o the use of replay. And also, in NBA games, not all assistants are going onto the court...usually its 2-3 of their job to make sure no one leaves the vicinity of the bench, because unlike NFHS/NCAA, while it's not an in-game penalty for just leaving the bench area during an altercation, it is an automatic one game fine and the league is real strict about this (just ask Amar'e about this).

Still, since coaches great input on the rules, I wouldn't be surprised to see this rule altered.

I am just saying it would not be a good idea. I am sure it would be considered a change. But then again not many fights anymore like this and I would not be surprised if nothing changes for a couple of situations that might involve a coach or two.

Peace

[MD Longhorn]

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.

[rockyroad]

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?

[dahoopref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

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 agree here. I've seen "Asst. Coaches" inflame the situation more by grabbing players (not even their own) to break up skirmishes that didn't start out as fights but ended up with punches thrown. From my experience, getting more people on the floor does not de-escalate the situation.

[Jesse James]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

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

Absolutely great move by the assistant coaches, who acted in the best interest of their team. Couldn't afford losing players for future game(s) for throwing hands.

Being ejected as an assistant is a miniscule price to pay.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

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

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'