NFHS fighting penalties
 

I would like to ask those who have worked games (or know someone who has) where a fight has broken out resulting in bench personnel entering the floor or entering the floor and participating: (1) Were you (they) able to correctly count, identify and remember who/how many entered the floor/participated? (2) Were you (they) fortunate enough to administer the penalties correctly? (3) And finally, would it be helpful if the penalties could somehow be simplified or are the current penalties okay as they are?
Thanks in advance for your input!

billyu2

If you break the penalties down, they are not that hard to administer.

I can agree that depending on what heppens, remembering exaclty who came off the bench cuold be a challenge.

Never had that situation myself in 27 years, (except on the test, it's ALWAYS THERE) be sure to nail the one(s) who started the actual fight, and do the best you can with the rest.

You Know Who They Are ...
 

So mentally "grab" as many as you can. Some will get away with something, but others won't. Don't guess. Keep a special eye out for the knuckleheads.

or one official go to the table and say "write this down: blue 21, 34, 55, white 1, 11, 32"

or, look to see who is still on the bench and EJ all the others.

Start Up The Bus ...
 

Nobody !!!

"if something breaks out tonight, I have home team bench...
 

Designate bench responsibilities before the game starts - U1 has home bench, U2 has visitors, R stays on fight. Remember the number of team members from warm-ups (12 warming up)

If I'm U1, I try to get where I can at least see home bench, count the number remaining on bench (do your math) and try to segregate returning bench personnel.

Our local group put together a power point a couple of years ago that's pretty good. If you contact me, I can send it to you.

Bob,

Around here, there is a discussion going on:

Side 1 - offset all penalties from all categories and only shoot the penalties that you can't offset? That means that you would never shoot f.throws at both ends?

Side 2 - offset penalties within each category. This means that you could have f.throws at each end?

I would be very interested in your opinion.

thanks

Mulk

Discussion here, too, but it seems clear to me that this is the correct option.

And, rather than designate before the game, I think it depends on the position of the officials when the fight breaks out. U1 could be "involved" with the fight, and U2 is way at the other end from the V's bench. Better to hace Us take H bench and R take V bench.

In our state, they will not allow us to separate, grab, etc. players, bench personnel. So, it becomes a matter of getting a pair of eyes on all 3 (fight, bench A, bench B) regardless of proximity. Some of our guys opt for and agree with your position method. Several others opt for the designated to avoid any "I thought I was closer to bench A or I was closer to fight" scenario.

Going to be confusing no matter what.

Makes sense since you don’t know where you’re going to be if something steps off.

The closest I came was a few years ago when A1 tried to go after my partner. It was in the 2nd half and I was T in from of Team A’s bench. The first thing I did was look at Team A’s head coach and shout, “Keep your players here!” The next thing I did was look at Team B’s bench and yell, “Stay right where you are!” Two of Team A’s subs missed the memo and were tossed because they left the bench area. The tough part was remembering who they were since they had their warm-ups on – they were deep on the bench, as in the only way they would’ve played is if the team was hit by a plague. Team B shot four FTs and eventually won in overtime.


I can’t see how Side 2 would ever happen. As long as the number of players leaving each bench is the same all of the flagrant Ts offset.

Jet,

I'm not sure that I understand your statement but the discussion boils down to how to offset penalties if there is a disparity in more than one category.

A very simple example: A1, A2 and A3 are fighting against B1. B6, B7 and B8 come off bench and join fight. A6 also comes off bench and joins fight.

Ruling?

Side 2 people want to offset within each category so Team B would shoot 4 f.throws because of the disparity in the players' category. Team A would also shoot 4 f.throws because of the disparity in the bench personnel category.

Side 1 people would offset across all categories and neither team would shoot f.throws.

And then who gets the ball?

Side 2 proponents would say that you resume play - with POI. But, I agree with you and the side 1 proponents. I don't think the Fed wanted the fight rule to turn into a f.throw shooting contest.

Sorry about that. I thought you were just dealing with bench personnel. Interestingly, all of the case book plays deal with the same number of players - as opposed to bench personnel - getting involved with one another.

At any rate now I see where you were going. I can also see what the Side 2 people are saying but I think their argument would depend something other than the disparity: did they determine the initial fight between the players started when the ball was live but the bench personnel joined in when the ball was dead? If that's the case then the situation becomes a false double foul so the penalty application would be separate and - in your example - Team A would get the ball at the division line after it was all over. If all the fouls are live ball or dead ball, just put them into one pot, everything comes out even and you go with POI.

Now, why anyone would want to do the Side 2 option is a mystery to me. Free throws = dead time. Dead time after a fight = more chances for something bad to happen.