Administering FTs after a fight

[Nevadaref]

2014-2015 NFHS Basketball Interpretations

---

Basketball Rules Interpretations - 2014-2015
By NFHS on October 16, 2014 basketball

Publisher’s Note: The National Federation of State High School Associations is the only source of official high school interpretations. They do not set aside nor modify any rule. They are made and published by the NFHS in response to situations presented.

Robert B. Gardner, Publisher, NFHS Publications © 2014

SITUATION 2: While the ball is live, players A1 and B1 commit fouls against each other at approximately the same time. A1 then punches B1. B6 and B7 leave the confines of the bench but do not participate in the fight.
RULING: The common fouls by A1 and B1 constitute a double personal foul, so no free throws are awarded. A1’s punch constitutes fighting and results in a flagrant technical foul, disqualification and the awarding of two free throws. B6 and B7 are assessed technical fouls and disqualified for entering the court illegally during a fight. Although B6 and B7 are both assessed technical fouls, only one is penalized with two free throws. The coach is penalized one indirect technical foul for B6 and B7 leaving the bench. [4-19-8; 10-3-7; 10-6 Penalties (Rule 10 Summary) 8.a, b]
Administration of Penalties: The double personal fouls offset and no free throws are awarded. With the marked lane spaces clear, any member of Team B (other than B6 and B7) attempts two free throws for the flagrant technical foul (fighting) by A1. These attempts are followed by any member of Team A (other than A1) attempting two free throws – with the marked lane spaces clear – for the technical foul charged to B6 and B7 for leaving the bench during a fight, but not participating. Following the free-throw attempts by Team A, play is resumed with a throw-in by Team A at the division line opposite the scorer’s table.
===============================================

I found this play ruling of interest as we have had several discussions on this topic before and there was no clear guidance as to whether or not FTs due to technical fouls committed by players on the court in the fight could be offset by FTs due to technical fouls charged to team members or coaches leaving the bench area.

We now have the NFHS answer. They are separate categories and do not cancel out. We have to shoot FTs at both ends of the court.

I'm not a fan of this, but understand.

[bob jenkins]

I was surprised no one commented on this when the interps first came out.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I was surprised no one commented on this when the interps first came out.

I just pretend I'll never have a fight in my games.

[JRutledge]

Nevada, do you think we should give two completely different Ts because of the fact two B players came off the bench?

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Nevada, do you think we should give two completely different Ts because of the fact two B players came off the bench?

I don't understand your question.
The proper ruling is to charge two technical fouls for B6 and B7 coming off the bench. The NFHS ruling says, "B6 and B7 are assessed technical fouls and disqualified for entering the court illegally during a fight."
The penalty for both of these technical fouls is simply only two FTs to the opposing team.

[AKOFL]

I thought the coach got a indirect for every player that came off the bench as well. guess i better look at that again

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I don't understand your question.
The proper ruling is to charge two technical fouls for B6 and B7 coming off the bench. The NFHS ruling says, "B6 and B7 are assessed technical fouls and disqualified for entering the court illegally during a fight."
The penalty for both of these technical fouls is simply only two FTs to the opposing team.

It is treated differently if they fight or if they just come off the bench right? This interpretation seems to have a different take than what was previously stated.

Peace

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by AKOFL

I thought the coach got a indirect for every player that came off the bench as well. guess i better look at that again

NFHS
Coach gets one indirect if one or 5 players come off the bench and don't participate. Each of those players is ejected and the team foul total is increased.

The coach gets an indirect T also for each player that comes off the bench and participates. If 3 come off the bench and fight the coach will be gone.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It is treated differently if they fight or if they just come off the bench right? This interpretation seems to have a different take than what was previously stated.

Peace

Fight procedures--When you get a minute take a look at nfhs case book play 10.4.5situation A (c) -- A1 and B1, players on court, punch each other at same time. A6 and A7 leave the bench but don't participate in a fight. B6 and B7 also leave their bench. B6 does NOT Participate but B7 does.

1. Penalize players originally on court first. A1 and B1 ejected, team could total goes up on each side by one. (flagrant Ts) no free throws cause number on court same.

2. Then look at number leaving bench for each side. if the number leaving the bench is the same you will NOT shoot free throws for bench personnel leaving the bench. A6, A7,B6, B7 all given flagrant Ts and ejected. team foul count increases on each side by 2.
Because player left bench for A and did not participate its coach is given an indirect T. Team B coach gets an indirect T because player left bench and didn't fight and also another indirect T for the player who did leave bench and Fight.

3. it would seem that A would get to shoot because a B bench player participated in the fight but that's not what rule says and case book play says.

Another NFHS rule not written clearly….

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by BigCat

Fight procedures--When you get a minute take a look at nfhs case book play 10.4.5situation A (c) -- A1 and B1, players on court, punch each other at same time. A6 and A7 leave the bench but don't participate in a fight. B6 and B7 also leave their bench. B6 does NOT Participate but B7 does.

1. Penalize players originally on court first. A1 and B1 ejected, team could total goes up on each side by one. (flagrant Ts) no free throws cause number on court same.

2. Then look at number leaving bench for each side. if the number leaving the bench is the same you will NOT shoot free throws for bench personnel leaving the bench. A6, A7,B6, B7 all given flagrant Ts and ejected. team foul count increases on each side by 2.
Because player left bench for A and did not participate its coach is given an indirect T. Team B coach gets an indirect T because player left bench and didn't fight and also another indirect T for the player who did leave bench and Fight.

3. it would seem that A would get to shoot because a B bench player participated in the fight but that's not what rule says and case book play says.

Another NFHS rule not written clearly….

There's nothing different about this case play between this year and last year. The last line of the penalty for NFHS 10.4.5 reads:

When a simultaneous technical foul(s) by opponents occurs, the free throws are not awarded when the penalties offset.

The act in 10.4.5 is "(leaving) the confines of the bench during a fight or when a fight may break out," regardless of whether the bench personnel get involved. The penalty is ejection and two FTs for the offended team. That matches up with the rule. The only difference in how it's handled is the effect on the HC. All four players left the confines of the bench so they're all ejected. Each team would be entitled to four FTs regardless of the affect on the HCs so those cancel out.

As far as the OP is concerned, I understand as well. The acts are connected by the same incident but they're still two separate acts.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

There's nothing different about this case play between this year and last year. The last line of the penalty for NFHS 10.4.5 reads:

When a simultaneous technical foul(s) by opponents occurs, the free throws are not awarded when the penalties offset.

The act in 10.4.5 is "(leaving) the confines of the bench during a fight or when a fight may break out," regardless of whether the bench personnel get involved. The penalty is ejection and two FTs for the offended team. That matches up with the rule. The only difference in how it's handled is the effect on the HC. All four players left the confines of the bench so they're all ejected. Each team would be entitled to four FTs regardless of the affect on the HCs so those cancel out.

As far as the OP is concerned, I understand as well. The acts are connected by the same incident but they're still two separate acts.

Agreed, the play has been in the book for a number of years. Also, agreed that fighting on the court and leaving the bench are separate acts penalized separately. this play addresses each separately also.

i was mentioning this play because what i see that confuses some folks, and what i don't like, is the fact that once you determine the number of personnel leaving the bench are equal you don't shoot free throws under the leaving the bench provisions,--- even when one team's bench people fight and the other's don't. there is another case book play where one player of A leaves the bench and does not fight and one of B leaves the bench and does fight. that play says those offset, no free throws and coach of each team gets one indirect. the penalty in that play is no worse for team B even though the B player fought.

was just throwing it out..correct me if i screwed something up.. thx