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)

Adam Sun Dec 29, 2013 11:56pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 916255)
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.

I'll agree with this.

Camron Rust Mon Dec 30, 2013 12:47am

Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 916255)
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.

I don't recall anyone saying otherwise.

OKREF Mon Dec 30, 2013 08:51am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam (Post 916243)
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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam (Post 916244)
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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 916259)
I don't recall anyone saying otherwise.

It seems they did.

Adam Mon Dec 30, 2013 09:05am

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKREF (Post 916267)
It seems they did.

Then you read me wrong. If A1 hadn't done anything T worthy here, I wouldn't advocate tossing her.

What she did was T-worthy. Where did I say otherwise?

JRutledge Mon Dec 30, 2013 09:09am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam (Post 916270)
Then you read me wrong. If A1 hadn't done anything T worthy here, I wouldn't advocate tossing her.

What she did was T-worthy. Where did I say otherwise?

This is why taunting and other things are often emphasized by the NF or local state organizations, because we allow these kinds of things to happen and we wonder why we have problems later.

Peace

VaTerp Mon Dec 30, 2013 09:19am

I'm late to the party and the original clip from youtube has been removed. The clip below shows the shove and punch but I'm assuming not as much of the aftermath discussed previously.

UPDATE: Player ejected after punch thrown during SB Washington vs. Oregon-Davis game | Local - Home

The one thing I can agree with is the lack of urgency on the part of the officials after the initial shove. Maybe this came out of nowhere but this is a reminder of the importance of dead ball awareness and trying to put out fires as quickly as possible.

On a side note, I lived in South Bend for 3 years and know the Washington coach, Skylar Diggins step-father, very well from my time there as well as professional connections since I moved back to the DC area. FWIW, he's a great guy, does a ton in the community, and his family is first class all the way. He's also done a good bit of officiating himself.

All of that has little to nothing to do with discussing the officiating aspects of the play but just thought I would add that given the title of the original link.

JetMetFan Mon Dec 30, 2013 10:32am

Video
 
Here's the original. Silly, silly people. Trying to keep it from us...


<iframe width="640" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/v_BzKTJYHOU?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Rich Mon Dec 30, 2013 11:52am

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 916176)
Agree. If those two officials were not wearing belts, then the knockout punch, and its aftermath, would never have occurred. See what happens when officials try to hold their pants up. The horror.

You may not care, but the second I see an official wearing a belt, my perception of them changes in a negative way. Period. I have never seen a top notch official wearing a belt at the HS or college level. (At least not since the early 1990s.)

You can keep on bragging about your belt all you like and the fact that they're still OK in CT (where you work zero 3-person, which is another indicator for me on the state of officiating in CT), but all this does is make me think that CT is even further behind the curve than where I live. Which is, in some ways, pretty hard since we're still working way too much 2-person for my liking.

Now, as for the play. Both are getting ejected. I'd have a technical foul on the initial shove by white and this started a fight. wouldn't even be a second thought in my mind. I also like to think that on the shove we're closing quickly and maybe with a strong whistle or two that punch doesn't happen.

The dead ball officiating (especially the baseball ejection mechanic by the guy with his shirt coming out of his pants and his standing over the injured player with his hand in the air) doesn't impress me a bit. Another official turns his eyes away form the court and the other players still there and doesn't seem to urgent about the entire situation. Those three officials need to become very well seen and the center of attention at that point and that just doesn't happen.

This whole thread is just a reminder that things like this can come from anywhere at any time and we need to be ready. Even in a girls game. :D

BillyMac Mon Dec 30, 2013 05:19pm

When In Rome, Except For Belts ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich (Post 916284)
You may not care, but the second I see an official wearing a belt, my perception of them changes in a negative way. Period. I have never seen a top notch official wearing a belt at the HS or college level. You can keep on bragging about your belt all you like and the fact that they're still OK in CT (where you work zero 3-person, which is another indicator for me on the state of officiating in CT), but all this does is make me think that CT is even further behind the curve than where I live.

I'm not bragging. I'm commenting on how some Forum members are open to the old "When in Rome ..." credo, while others aren't. I'm totally against the "When in Texas" concept of sounding one's whistle before entering the court to warn players to stop dunking. I would view it as silly here in Connecticut. However, I would never question that this is the right thing to do in Texas. I'm pretty certain that very good high school varsity officials, in many parts of the country, don't shower after the game, but simply leave in uniform. That's fine for those other parts of the country, but it would be considered a major faux pas here in Connecticut, enough to slow down one's movement up the officiating ladder.

Belts are allowed here in Connecticut. Period. Belts are neither encouraged, nor are they discouraged. Period. This is how our cadets are trained. Whether one wears beltless slacks, or one wears a belt, has absolutely no bearing on one's rating, ranking, the level games one gets assigned, the number of games one gets assigned, or whether, or not, one "makes" the state tournament list. Period. Are you accusing me of lying?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich (Post 916284)
I have never seen a top notch official wearing a belt at the HS level.

Then you certainly haven't seen our top Connecticut officials working games. Most don't wear belts, a few veterans do. I would never discuss the quality of your officials until I have actually seen them work games. If you were to tell me that some of your top officials work games wearing shoes with quite a bit of white on them, I would never prejudge them to be poor officials, until I actually observed them work games. Wearing all black shoes does not necessarily make a great official, especially in regions where shoes with some white on them may be neither encouraged, nor may they be discouraged.

Regarding three person games. The winningest coaches in the state, those that play an up tempo, defensively oriented, man to man defense, full court press, style of basketball, don't want a third official. Period. They believe that it will lead to more fouls, more free throws, more players in foul trouble, and fewer wins for them. These guys are the leaders of the Connecticut Coaches Association, a very strong organization here in the state. They strongly lobby our state interscholastic sports governing body to not move to three person games. Our state interscholastic sports governing body listens to these coaches, and their organization. Officials want to go to three person games. Many coaches want to go to three person games. A minority of vocal coaches, leading a very strong lobbying organization, don't, so we don't.

AremRed Mon Dec 30, 2013 09:29pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by VaTerp (Post 916273)
On a side note, I lived in South Bend for 3 years and know the Washington coach, Skylar Diggins step-father, very well from my time there as well as professional connections since I moved back to the DC area. FWIW, he's a great guy, does a ton in the community, and his family is first class all the way. He's also done a good bit of officiating himself.

Which guy in the video is the Washington head coach?

VaTerp Tue Dec 31, 2013 09:08am

Quote:

Originally Posted by JetMetFan (Post 916278)
Here's the original. Silly, silly people. Trying to keep it from us...


<iframe width="640" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/v_BzKTJYHOU?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Thanks! I think the officials and game management were fortunate here because things could have really escalated. The officials seem pretty lackadaisical throughout the whole thing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 916341)
Which guy in the video is the Washington head coach?

He is the shorter, bald black guy in the green shirt who all of the coaches in grey seem to get a word in with.

ballgame99 Tue Dec 31, 2013 09:42am

I've got a T on white, and a flagrant T and ejection for green, bench T on white for assistants all over the floor, and a T for white's head coach for his taunting actions, possibly even an ejection depending on what he was yelling. Also see some green assistants out there, so give them a bench T as well. Green head coach seemed to behave himself.

I'm sure I'm wrong on some of this, but that is what I would have.

In the scenario above you have the initial common foul on green that you need to shoot for (if in bonus), the two player technicals cancel, the two bench Ts cancel, Green is shooting two technical free throws for the tech on white coach, green ball at division line.

OK, now tell me where I screwed up... :D

edit to add: thanks Jets for adding that video, I was late to the party and missed it the first time.

Adam Tue Dec 31, 2013 09:59am

In a fight situation, the HC gets to come out to tend to his players and help prevent/stop the fight. If he does anything else, particularly engaging the opponents in an adversarial manner, he gets a flagrant T.
All of his assistants that came on the court get tossed as well.

lpneck Tue Dec 31, 2013 10:12am

I have 5 ejections based on the video:

1.) Flagrant technical foul on W43- Fight Instigation
2.) Flagrant technical foul on G2- Fighting
3/4.) Flagrant technical foul on both head coaches- Leaving the bench during a fight for reasons other than preventing the situation from escalating.
5.) Flagrant technical foul on W asst. coach- Leaving the bench during a fight. (He initially goes on to the floor to tend to the injured player, and I might have given him the benefit of the doubt to allow him on the floor because of that, but then he starts jawing at the official and finally confronts the green head coach, including engaging him by putting both hands on him.

W43's sub will shoot any bonus free throws for the common foul, followed by 2 FT's for green, followed by a division line throw-in for green.

Rich Tue Dec 31, 2013 10:14am

Quote:

Originally Posted by VaTerp (Post 916364)
Thanks! I think the officials and game management were fortunate here because things could have really escalated. The officials seem pretty lackadaisical throughout the whole thing.

You put into words pretty well what my thoughts are. That said, I've never had something like this in basketball in 27 seasons (I've had a bench clearing or two in baseball).

This is the time when you wear out the whistle and make yourself as visible as possible and they certainly didn't do that.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:21pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1