Play opinion

[Ref_in_Alberta]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Can you explain this more? Why did he go off? What did he say? Why was he given more than 1 tech? Anything you know.

Many F-bombs laced in with disrespectful comments directed at the officials. Whack.
AND as he was leaving the floor he turned back and had more to say. Whack, Get out.

No question that the player's behavior earned himself the disqualification.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I wasn't there but by reading the OP he went off b/c he felt a foul should have been called 12 seconds earlier to save time.

And it's an Adult Rec League, 2 Tech can come very quickly in those venues.

This is accurate.

[Ref_in_Alberta]

The team in white was trying to foul to stop the clock. It was fairly obvious as the were all shouting to each other to use this tactic. With the body position of the black team player, my experience tells me that a steal wasn't going to happen.

I think on this play, the marginal contact should of been called as it was obvious that the foul was coming. IF the crew makes this call and puts the guy on the FT for the penalty I don't think W#12 explodes and earns the ejection.

In the end though the "right" team won the game and I didn't have to step between anybody and my friends.

{and I didn't have to write up the Technical Foul report as this league requires for all T's, Unsportsmanlike and Disqualifying fouls ( read FIBA equivalent to FF1 & FF2), that was on the crew}

Thanks everyone for your input.

[MathReferee]

Originally Posted by Ref_in_Alberta

The team in white was trying to foul to stop the clock. It was fairly obvious as the were all shouting to each other to use this tactic.

If I hear a coach or player say this, I am calling the first attempt that makes contact if for no other reason than preventing more severe contact.

[Nevadaref]

A few years ago (2006-07) the NFHS published instructions on late game fouling in its Points of Emphasis. Read this thread for a discussion of this topic.

Late Game Fouling

I posted the NFHS language in posts 4 and 34.

[Nevadaref]

It is sad to see that according to the results of the poll connected to this thread several officials are not following the desire of the NFHS.


2006-07 POINTS OF EMPHASIS

• Contact – Contact that is not considered a foul early in the game should not be considered a foul late in the game simply because a team "wants" to foul. Conversely, contact that is deemed intentional late in the game should likewise be called intentional early in the game.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

It is sad to see that according to the results of the poll connected to this thread several officials are not following the desire of the NFHS.


2006-07 POINTS OF EMPHASIS

• Contact – Contact that is not considered a foul early in the game should not be considered a foul late in the game simply because a team "wants" to foul. Conversely, contact that is deemed intentional late in the game should likewise be called intentional early in the game.

The poll results reflect reality. End of game fouling situations simply don't have the same threshold as to what constitutes a foul compared to other situations in the game. NFHS can try to put out a POE to say otherwise, but I've never heard anyone, regardless of what level, advocate calling this situation too purely. Otherwise, you get the defense pissed off because you aren't calling the foul, so they decided they're going to have to get their money's worth. Doing it NFHS' way seems like a good way for escalation of contact and emotions...when everyone knows what the deal is at the end of the game except for the officials.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by MathReferee

If I hear a coach or player say this, I am calling the first attempt that makes contact if for no other reason than preventing more severe contact.

If the winning team is just holding the ball and is willing to take the free throws after strategic fouls, then let’s call the foul immediately, so the ballhandler doesn't get hit harder to draw a whistle.