Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 916175)

1) two of the officials are wearing belts - are you serious? see Billy's response
2) C is leaning side to side during transition - Leaning isn't allowed in your area?
3) neither L nor T close down when W43 pushes off with her arm, or when G2 begins to advance on her - This all happened pretty quick. I don't think Usein Bolt would have made this either.
4) neither L or T attempt to separate the players, instead they stand back and just put their arms in the air - In most HS games, if a scrum erupts my partner(s) and I just stand back and observe. Let "game management" break things up. At best you can have one official try to slow things down but beyond these 2 knuckleheads there wasn't anything else from the players.
5) L ejects the girl and keeps his arm in the air for 35 seconds while ignoring anything else he should be taking care of - First of your points I can agree with.
6) C allows the woman in the neon green shirt to come on the floor and grab G2 - Should the C have tackled her?
7) none of the officials send the players to their benches - I agree
8) none of the officials notice two opposing coaches confronting each other until too late, twice - Agree here too
9) none of the coaches involved in the confrontation are issued technicals, hopefully they were tech'd later
10) dude in plaid green shirt is allowed to wander all over the court from 0:17 on (could be off-duty cop, def not game admin) - How do you know this?
11) the coaches again confront each other, with an official standing right there not doing anything. Nothing productive can come from this. - Maybe they were making plans for the teams to have a group dinner after the game? You seem to know a lot of what went on the court...

Originally Posted by Freddy (Post 916182)

To my understanding this is discouraged anyhow.
Am I correct? Or am I in need of enlightenment?

Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 916185)

I'm not sure about the basketball direction, most of my confrontation training comes from soccer. The theory there is to "be the 3rd man in". If the officials are the 3rd person on the scene after the original two players then most of the other players won't try to retaliate. In this situation getting in the area and immediately sending the players to their benches would be best. Certainly one official should hang back and collect player numbers/monitor the benches but the other two officials should be in the middle right away.

Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 916175)

1) two of the officials are wearing belts
2) C is leaning side to side during transition
3) neither L nor T close down when W43 pushes off with her arm, or when G2 begins to advance on her
4) neither L or T attempt to separate the players, instead they stand back and just put their arms in the air
5) L ejects the girl and keeps his arm in the air for 35 seconds while ignoring anything else he should be taking care of
6) C allows the woman in the neon green shirt to come on the floor and grab G2
7) none of the officials send the players to their benches
8) none of the officials notice two opposing coaches confronting each other until too late, twice
9) none of the coaches involved in the confrontation are issued technicals, hopefully they were teched later
10) dude in plaid green shirt is allowed to wander all over the court from 0:17 on (could be off-duty cop, def not game admin)
11) the coaches again confront each other, with an official standing right there not doing anything. Nothing productive can come from this.

Originally Posted by deecee (Post 916171)

1 T for white and a flagrant for green.

Originally Posted by deecee (Post 916188)

I think basketball fights are a bit different than soccer fights :p. Less faking maybe :D.

If things escalate I can guarantee you the "3rd man in" won't change anything.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 916189)

As deecee said, over half of those points are irrelevant, unreasonable, guesses, or just wrong. You got a 2-3 of them right however. Makes it look more like you just want to bust their chops from your armchair than have a serious commentary.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 916190)

Wouldn't that be a flagrant on both? White committed an unsportsmanlike act that caused green to retaliate by fighting.

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 916192)

Not sure if I have anything on white. What she did does not justify the retaliation.

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 916192)

Not sure if I have anything on white. What she did does not justify the retaliation.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 916194)

I would certainly have nothing on it own, but when it causes retaliation, I don't feel I can ignore it.

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 916195)

I don't think we can go by that. I say "Thank you," but all you hear is "____K you" and assume the worst and retaliate. It happens.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 916200)

That is not what I said. If it is something unsportsmanlike, you can sometimes ignore it if it is smaller and deal with it in various ways but when it causes a fighting level retaliation, you can no longer ignore it. I'm not saying a benign action becomes unsportsmanlike because someone incorrectly reacts to it.

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 916192)

Not sure if I have anything on white. What she did does not justify the retaliation.