The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   A bit of a mess at an Indiana HS game (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/96889-bit-mess-indiana-hs-game.html)

jeremy341a Sun Dec 29, 2013 07:30pm

Both players are gone. White's actions are unsportsmanlike and directly led to the fight and all the other extracurriculars. If it was seen it can't be ignored. I'll bet you one thing. She will think twice before giving anyone the get off me nudge in the future.

OKREF Sun Dec 29, 2013 07:43pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremy341a (Post 916212)
Both players are gone. White's actions are unsportsmanlike and directly led to the fight and all the other extracurriculars. If it was seen it can't be ignored. I'll bet you one thing. She will think twice before giving anyone the get off me nudge in the future.

Whites actions don't warrant an ejection. No punch and it wasn't flagrant. Would you jet her if the punch didn't happen, I would think no. Just because it lead to green throwing a punch isn't grounds for an ejection, IMO.

Adam Sun Dec 29, 2013 07:46pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by okref (Post 916215)
whites actions don't warrant an ejection. No punch and it wasn't flagrant. Would you jet her if the punch didn't happen, i would think no. Just because it lead to green throwing a punch isn't grounds for an ejection, imo.

4-18-2 indicates otherwise.

just another ref Sun Dec 29, 2013 07:53pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam (Post 916217)
4-18-2 indicates otherwise.


But in 4.18.2 the initial action, in and of itself, would warrant a technical foul. So it this causes a fight, both players are gone. In the OP the original action, in and of itself, was nothing, in my opinion. That makes a big difference.

AremRed Sun Dec 29, 2013 07:56pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam (Post 916217)
4-18-2 indicates otherwise.

4-18-2 "An attempt to instigate a fight by committing an unsporting act that causes a person to retaliate by fighting."

I don't see any intentional instigation here, one could argue for unintentional instigation.

Maineac Sun Dec 29, 2013 08:06pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKREF (Post 916198)
As for the coaches, I don't know what I would do there. Is them arguing between each a technical foul?

10-4-5 NOTE: The head coach may enter the court in the situation where a fight may break out - or has broken out - to prevent the situation from escalating.

PENALTY: (Art. 5) Flagrant foul, disqualification of individual offender, but only one technical-foul penalty is administered regardless of the number of offenders. This one foul is also charged indirectly to the head coach. If the head coach is an offender, an additional flagrant technical foul is charged to directly to the coach and penalized.

JRutledge Sun Dec 29, 2013 08:18pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 916221)
4-18-2 "An attempt to instigate a fight by committing an unsporting act that causes a person to retaliate by fighting."

I don't see any intentional instigation here, one could argue for unintentional instigation.

If you instigated, you instigated, it does not matter what your intentions were in the rule.

Peace

bob jenkins Sun Dec 29, 2013 08:23pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 916221)
unintentional instigation.

That's a rule book term with which I am unfamiliar.

AremRed Sun Dec 29, 2013 08:25pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 916224)
If you instigated, you instigated, it does not matter what your intentions were in the rule.

By that logic you could consider an seemingly innocuous action to be "instigation" if a player reacts to it and punches someone.

According to the dictionary, instigation means "to cause to come about". Did the action by W43 "cause to come about" the punch by G2? Yes.

However, 4-18-2 specifies "An attempt to instigate a fight". Was the action by W43 "an attempt to instigate a fight"? No.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 916228)
That's a rule book term with which I am unfamiliar.

It depends on how you define "instigation". See above.

JRutledge Sun Dec 29, 2013 08:35pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 916230)
By that logic you could consider an seemingly innocuous action to be "instigation" if a player reacts to it and punches someone.

According to the dictionary, instigation means "to cause to come about". Did the action by W43 "cause to come about" the punch by G2? Yes.

However, 4-18-2 specifies "An attempt to instigate a fight". Was the action by W43 "an attempt to instigate a fight"? No.

First of all we are not dealing with the dictionary. The rulebook only talks about instigation and gives examples like trash talking that leads to a player being punched. It does not say in the rulebook or casebook that certain words are intentional instigation and others are unintentional. Since the first action clearly lead to a reaction to the green player that threw a punch, I am not going to split hairs on who did what first. It is on tape and the actions was unnecessary IMO. You may not agree, but I am ejecting the white player too. The rule does not say only a punch is fighting.

Peace

jeremy341a Sun Dec 29, 2013 08:45pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 916219)
But in 4.18.2 the initial action, in and of itself, would warrant a technical foul. So it this causes a fight, both players are gone. In the OP the original action, in and of itself, was nothing, in my opinion. That makes a big difference.

The original action was more than nothing IMO. I would be fine with a technical foul even if green didn't retaliate. I see this as a violation of 10-3-7

Possibly even be a violation of 10-3-6c. An argument could be made that she was baiting her opponent.

Adam Sun Dec 29, 2013 09:51pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 916219)
But in 4.18.2 the initial action, in and of itself, would warrant a technical foul. So it this causes a fight, both players are gone. In the OP the original action, in and of itself, was nothing, in my opinion. That makes a big difference.

It wasn't "nothing" IMO. If it's the first sign of trouble, she's getting a quick chat about keeping her head in the game.

If it's post-chat, then it's a T.

If it starts a fight, then it's a flagrant T either way, IMO.

Adam Sun Dec 29, 2013 09:53pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 916230)
By that logic you could consider an seemingly innocuous action to be "instigation" if a player reacts to it and punches someone.

According to the dictionary, instigation means "to cause to come about". Did the action by W43 "cause to come about" the punch by G2? Yes.

However, 4-18-2 specifies "An attempt to instigate a fight". Was the action by W43 "an attempt to instigate a fight"? No.



It depends on how you define "instigation". See above.

IMO, if you're going to require intent here as you indicate, the rule is useless. I agree it's not the best wording, but it makes more sense to me than requiring the player to have intentionally started a fight. The action itself was intentional.

I'd much rather get rid of both eggs.

Added note:
"Useless" may be a bit strong. It's possible the rule is intended to only apply to a player attempting to bait his opponent into a fight.

Raymond Sun Dec 29, 2013 10:13pm

A1 gave a shove to B1 and B1 threw a punch. A1's act was unsporting IMO and therefore part of the fight.

I believe Judge Judy calls it coming to court with "unclean hands".

just another ref Sun Dec 29, 2013 11:37pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 916248)
A1 gave a shove to B1 and B1 threw a punch. A1's act was unsporting IMO and therefore part of the fight.

This is the key. If you think that this was an unsporting act, then yes, kick 'em both out. That is debatable, but I can live with it. But we cannot simply say that whatever A did which provoked B and caused the fight must result in the ejection of both players. A is falling. B catches him, although somewhat roughly. A misinterprets the act and responds with a punch. The first act must be judged and a line must be drawn.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:09pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1