Disconcertion From The Bench

[BigT]

Originally Posted by BigT

roflmao

I knew a referee who was slapped on the butt by a cheerleader last year. That would have distracted me... what on earth did the cheerleader do to give this guy another shot?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Do not even consider cheerleaders and fans when applying this rule.

Agree 100%.

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

The word Opponent has never been defined in the Rules.

Technically, true, but lets look outside of Rule 4 for some help from the NFHS as to how they define opponents:

2011-12 POINTS OF EMPHASIS
1. SPORTING BEHAVIOR. The NFHS Basketball Rules Committee continues to be concerned about the following behaviors:
A. Pregame Situations. Teams entering the gymnasium prior to the contest should not run through the area occupied by
the opposing team or under the basket where opponents are warming up.

I doubt that the opponents are only the five players (this is my best evidence, the rest is borderline silly).

NFHS Common Symptoms of Concussion Include: Unsure of game, score or opponent.

I doubt that the possibly concussed player is going to say the name of one of the five players, probably going to say, "East Oshkosh", referring to the entire team.

NFHS Coaches Code of Ethics: The coach shall not scout opponents by any means other than those adopted by the league and/or state high school athletic association.

I doubt that the coach is only going to scout five players at a time, he will probably scout the entire team.

The citations above are, granted, quite weak, and kind of lame, but they are evidence that leads me to believe that the NFHS considers opponents to include the five players, and bench personnel.

While not defined in Rule 4, we can always go to a dictionary:

Opponent (Noun): a person who is on an opposing side in a game, contest, controversy, or the like; adversary.

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Opponent in the context of the Disconcertion Rule (NFHS) that the rule applies to the five defensive players on the court; it does NOT apply to Bench Personnel.

You could be correct, but I've yet to see any evidence, rule reference, case play, or any other citation from anyone on the Forum, or anywhere else, that proves that bench personnel can't be opponents. Nor have I seen any similar evidence to the contrary, i.e., supporting my side of the debate, other than the evidence that I have cited above. Does weak evidence trump no evidence?

Let's add a little mustard, just to make things interesting.

How about the opposing coach on the bench disconcerting the free thrower? He's not a player, but he is part of the bench personnel. Is he an opponent? Could we go with a violation, or do we go directly to an unsporting technical foul?

Note: Thanks for letting Mark come out to play with us Mrs. DeNucci.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree 100%.



Technically, true, but lets look outside of Rule 4 for some help from the NFHS as to how they define opponents:

2011-12 POINTS OF EMPHASIS
1. SPORTING BEHAVIOR. The NFHS Basketball Rules Committee continues to be concerned about the following behaviors:
A. Pregame Situations. Teams entering the gymnasium prior to the contest should not run through the area occupied by
the opposing team or under the basket where opponents are warming up.

I doubt that the opponents are only the five players (this is my best evidence, the rest is borderline silly).

NFHS Common Symptoms of Concussion Include: Unsure of game, score or opponent.

I doubt that the possibly concussed player is going to say the name of one of the five players, probably going to say, "East Oshkosh", referring to the entire team.

NFHS Coaches Code of Ethics: The coach shall not scout opponents by any means other than those adopted by the league and/or state high school athletic association.

I doubt that the coach is only going to scout five players at a time, he will probably scout the entire team.

The citations above are, granted, quite weak, and kind of lame, but they are evidence that leads me to believe that the NFHS considers opponents to include the five players, and bench personnel.

While not defined in Rule 4, we can always go to a dictionary:

Opponent (Noun): a person who is on an opposing side in a game, contest, controversy, or the like; adversary.



You could be correct, but I've yet to see any evidence, rule reference, case play, or any other citation from anyone on the Forum, or anywhere else, that proves that bench personnel can't be opponents. Nor have I seen any similar evidence to the contrary, i.e., supporting my side of the debate, other than the evidence that I have cited above. Does weak evidence trump no evidence?

Let's add a little mustard, just to make things interesting.

How about the opposing coach on the bench disconcerting the free thrower? He's not a player, but he is part of the bench personnel. Is he an opponent? Could we go with a violation, or do we go directly to an unsporting technical foul?

Note: Thanks for letting Mark come out to play with us Mrs. DeNucci.

Billy:

I want to thank you for adding valid points to the discussion. (I was too lazy to climb up into the attic to read them. ) But you show how muddle the information is concerning this particular rule.

When pressed for a definitive interpretation, I will go with the interpretation that says Violation for the five defensive players on the court and TF for Bench Personnel. BUT I wouldn't get upset if an official only enforced a Violation on Bench Personnel if the infraction was not egregious. That is why I am more flexible with games played at the Jr. H.S. level and below.

Until the NFHS and NCAA Rules Committees define what is an opponent per the Disconcertion Rule, we will continue to have this discussion.

MTD, Sr.

[Zoochy]

Why do opposing coaches yell "Rebound" during a Free Throw? Sometimes it is on the 1st of 2 throws. No intent to disconcert there.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Zoochy

Why do opposing coaches yell "Rebound" during a Free Throw ... Sometimes it is on the 1st of 2 throws.

Tourette's Syndrome?

[stripes]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

GV game, a few years ago: 1st half - during 1st of 2 FT's - bench players: "stomp, stomp, clap, clap, "Miss it! Miss it!" and repeated . . .
Delayed violation signal, and shooter made the 1st shot. We then informed the coach that the choreographed actions would not be tolerated, and could be considered unsporting. She asked if they couldn't say anything during the shots.
We replied that the issue was the choreography, and as long as the verbiage and comments were not out-of-line, they could feel free to express themselves. She and her players seemed to understand, and we had no further incidents.

For me this is an example of something I would not even bother addressing. I said it before, this is not golf...noise and distractions are part of the game...even from the bench. Don't look for trouble.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by stripes

For me this is an example of something I would not even bother addressing. I said it before, this is not golf...noise and distractions are part of the game...even from the bench. Don't look for trouble.

I'd have no problem addressing that situation.

1. It's bush league garbage. The coach should be embarassed to be doing it.
2. It's rare, so telling him to knock it off is easy.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

GV game, a few years ago: 1st half - during 1st of 2 FT's - bench players: "stomp, stomp, clap, clap, "Miss it! Miss it!" and repeated . . . Delayed violation signal, and shooter made the 1st shot. We then informed the coach that the choreographed actions would not be tolerated, and could be considered unsporting.

Originally Posted by stripes

For me this is an example of something I would not even bother addressing ... noise and distractions are part of the game...even from the bench.

Wrong. It's unsporting, it's not part of the game of basketball, and it has to be addressed in some manner, maybe just a warning, maybe a disconcertion violation, or maybe the "nuclear" option of an unsporting technical foul. An official cannot ignore this type of behavior.

[stripes]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Wrong. It's unsporting, it's not part of the game of basketball, and it has to be addressed in some manner, maybe just a warning, maybe a disconcertion violation, or maybe the "nuclear" option of an unsporting technical foul. An official cannot ignore this type of behavior.

Totally disagree. Noise and distractions are part of the game. If you want to open that can of worms...be my guest. I see nothing wrong with what the bench personnel were described as doing. IMO, a FT shooter should be able tune out the things described and that makes them, once again, IMO, something to ignore.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by stripes

Totally disagree. Noise and distractions are part of the game. If you want to open that can of worms...be my guest. I see nothing wrong with what the bench personnel were described as doing. IMO, a FT shooter should be able tune out the things described and that makes them, once again, IMO, something to ignore.

STRIPES: I AM GOING TO STOP THIS NONSENSE NOW!! THE BEHAVIOR BY BENCH PERSONNEL DESCRIBED IN A POST ABOVE IS ABSOLUTELY PROHIBITED BY RULE: IT IS UNSPORTSMANLIKE CONDUCT AND IF YOU DO NOT HAVE THE INTESTINAL FORTITUDE TO ENFORCE IT THEN GET THE HELL OUT OF THE BASKETBALL OFFICIATING PROFESSION! THERE IS NO DEFENSE THAT YOU CAN GIVE FOR FAILURE TO PENALIZE BENCH PERSONNEL FOR THIS TYPE OF CONDUCT! I CANNOT BELIEVE THAT YOU WOULD TAKE THE POSITION THAT THIS TYPE OF CONDUCT IS ALLOWED BY THE RULES!

MTD, Sr.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

STRIPES: I AM GOING TO STOP THIS NONSENSE NOW!! THE BEHAVIOR BY BENCH PERSONNEL DESCRIBED IN A POST ABOVE IS ABSOLUTELY PROHIBITED BY RULE: IT IS UNSPORTSMANLIKE CONDUCT AND IF YOU DO NOT HAVE THE INTESTINAL FORTITUDE TO ENFORCE IT THEN GET THE HELL OUT OF THE BASKETBALL OFFICIATING PROFESSION! THERE IS NO DEFENSE THAT YOU CAN GIVE FOR FAILURE TO PENALIZE BENCH PERSONNEL FOR THIS TYPE OF CONDUCT! I CANNOT BELIEVE THAT YOU WOULD TAKE THE POSITION THAT THIS TYPE OF CONDUCT IS ALLOWED BY THE RULES!

C'mon Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Tell us what you really think. Don't be so wishy washy. Don't hold it in. Let it all out.

[stripes]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

STRIPES: I AM GOING TO STOP THIS NONSENSE NOW!! THE BEHAVIOR BY BENCH PERSONNEL DESCRIBED IN A POST ABOVE IS ABSOLUTELY PROHIBITED BY RULE: IT IS UNSPORTSMANLIKE CONDUCT AND IF YOU DO NOT HAVE THE INTESTINAL FORTITUDE TO ENFORCE IT THEN GET THE HELL OUT OF THE BASKETBALL OFFICIATING PROFESSION! THERE IS NO DEFENSE THAT YOU CAN GIVE FOR FAILURE TO PENALIZE BENCH PERSONNEL FOR THIS TYPE OF CONDUCT! I CANNOT BELIEVE THAT YOU WOULD TAKE THE POSITION THAT THIS TYPE OF CONDUCT IS ALLOWED BY THE RULES!

MTD, Sr.

MTD, please stop shouting and get off your high horse. Don't try and patronize me by using bold font and capital letters. Shouting and high post counts don't make you right. Trying to tell me to leave officiating because you disagree with me is ludicrous. I don't know who died and made you the over-lord of officiating, but here is a news flash: you're not that guy. You don't know a thing about me, my officiating or my "intestinal fortitude." If you, or anyone else, wants to call things like this, I can't stop you, but what I end up doing in my games is cleaning up the mess from people doing things like this.

If you don't like my opinions, ignore them. I have found that easily done with you.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by stripes

Trying to tell me to leave officiating because you disagree with me is ludicrous.

I have to agree with this. The response from MTD was way out of proportion with the issue.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by stripes

Shouting and high post counts don't make you right.

Correct. Being right is what makes him right.

Trying to tell me to leave officiating because you disagree with me is ludicrous.

He was not telling you to leave because you disagree with each other. He was telling you that if you can't see this as an obvious thing you need to handle, then you don't have the intestinal fortitude to do this job. Thus, you should stop.

You don't know a thing about me, my officiating or my "intestinal fortitude."

Bluntly, sir, yes we do ... based solely on your own comments.

what I end up doing in my games is cleaning up the mess from people doing things like this.

Actually those who don't handle business like this make things more difficult on everyone else. I can't imagine a scenario where your predecessors handling this crap from the bench could possibly make things harder on someone unable to handle it on his own. The logic here makes no sense.

If you don't like my opinions, ignore them. I have found that easily done with you.

Despite evidence to the contrary; exhibit A being this post.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Smitty

I have to agree with this. The response from MTD was way out of proportion with the issue.

I agree, this is mostly a non-issue or something solved with a quick word. I do not think we need to make much more out of it then that.

Peace