Silly Contradiction
 

In the two snipped situations below, does anyone else think the opposite rulings are a bit silly.

SITUATION 6: Players A1 and B1 are fighting each other away from the ball and play is stopped. The head coach of Team A rushes onto the court to stop the fight.

RULING: ... The head coach is allowed to enter the court without being beckoned by an official when there is a fight so there is not a penalty assessed on him/her for this action. ....(4-19-4; 4-36; 10-4-5 Note)


SITUATION 8: A fight breaks out between A1 and B1 during a dead ball and clock-stopped situation. The assistant coach from Team A rushes onto the floor to assist with stopping the fight.

RULING: .... The assistant coach is assessed a flagrant technical foul and disqualified from the contest for entering the floor during the fight. The assistant coach is not allowed to enter the floor to help with stopping a fight....(4-19-4; 10-4-5)

If a coach is coming onto the floor to be of help, assistant or otherwise, there is NO WAY I will be calling a T on them. If anything, I'm going to thank them for helping get things under control.

Perhaps the NFHS thinks assistant coaches are less self-controlled than head coaches?

The logic I can see is that the head coach is the person in charge.

Camron, you say there's "no way" you're tossing the assistant if he/she enters the court. How about if Team B's coach points it out to you and/or your partner? I know if I'm Team B's HC or assistant I'll be pointing it out because that's potentially two FTs and the ball for my team.

Luckily, or for whatever reason, I have only had ONE fight happen. And that was in my very FIRST varsity game. (I reviewed the film later, and should have seen it coming)...but, that is another story.


I agree Camron...and I have already thought of this scenario...if a Coach had come out on the court to help with a fight, before this new rule, I would have "beckoned" him. Same goes for an assistant now, he will have been "beckoned".;)

Check with your local association but the rule change may not leave the option to "beckon" anyone else. The rule says the HC can come out. It doesn't mention anyone else.

I remember this past season, there was a college game where some assistants were tossed for doing nothing more than break up a fight. My position on the rule hasn't changed from then. Assuming the assistant is there in a peacekeeping role, I'm sure not going toss him for helping to break up a fight.

NCAAW - I won't speak to NCAAM - changed its rule for the coming season. The HC + one assistant can leave the bench. After that we start tossing coaches.

Everybody Stay Here ...
 

... and they keep things under control by making sure, while the head coach is on the floor helping to stop the fight, that the bench players do not follow their head coach onto the floor. If we end up with players, bench personnel, head coaches, assistant coaches, and officials, all on the floor at the same time during a fight, than things can get really complicated.

My take is that this new interpretation applies only to a which coach can enter the floor without being beckoned. I'll follow the lead from my local interpreter.

hairy as hell...
 

The video that I have seen of fights around here get pretty hairy with mommas, daddies, cheerleaders, scorekeepers, principals, etc. on the court and most seem to be restoring order. I think it will be hard for me to catch the assistant coach out there also trying to restore order.

I think it's a stretch to even allow them on the court if they are "beckoned."

The NCAAM rule is (I think) the same.

I agree that the rule should / could allow it, and one of our interpreters here suggested the same thing you did.

State director, in online rules meeting which came out yesterday and is taken by both officials and coaches, offered the direction that assistant coaches were to remain on the sidelines to maintain control of the benches, presumably keeping the players from leaving the bench area.
That made sense to me. If they do.

Part of the explanation given to us was that it would be better for the assisstant(s) to keep the bench in order ...

You're allowed to have opinions about whether a rule is right or fair or not.

But it really bothers me that an official (of any sport) would state that they know and understand the rule but would never enforce it correctly - on purpose.

I have no problem with the rule. Assistants are not responsible for the team the way the HC is under the rules. If you do not want to worry about this stuff, do not have kids in the game that cause those kinds of problems. Coaches know when they have a knucklehead and if you want to avoid these situations keep them on the bench of take them off the team. This is why I do not like talking to assistants in the first place. The HC is the guy that has the ultimate responsiblity. If they want that responsiblity then get a HC job and I will treat them like a HC.

There is too much video tape not to apply the rule in this situation. And with the way things have gone nuts with a very public event in our state, I am not going to clearly ignore a rule like this.

Peace