give them the two free throws....and the ball....no problem....thats the award for the penalty.....just don't move the throw in spot.....

That's your prerogative but that's one of the reasons as to why. Despite what you think, it is far simpler to say that a technical foul will result in two shots and the ball at the division line. The Fed has always put a premium on simplicity in enforcement and that's in all of their sports, not just basketball.

The problem is that the definition of fairness is rather subjective. I personally see nothing unfair with a uniform enforcement like they have now. That is fair in that it is a rule that applies to both teams.

So again, what you want FROM US?

Do you think we write the rules or something?

Aren't you an official? What are you going to do about fixing this?

well all I can tell you was one of the coaches was really happy to see the ball get moved to half court and the other one wasn't.....I'll let you figure out which one was which.....

I'm guessing you were the one that wasn't?

that was funny:D

Because at the HS level I believe the NF wants to make these actions more punitive. It is that simple from my point of view. The purpose of sports in other levels is not the same at the HS level.

Peace

It's times like this I really miss Jurassic. :(

I never asked you to do anything....this is an officiating forum where I thought we could discuss things like this and seek out opinions from other officials and have some discussions.....

quite honestly I am surprised by the "thats just the way it is, it all comes out in the wash, make your free throws" points of view.....

I would have thought there would have been more "you know it doesn't make a lot of sense" views in here.....but I guess I was wrong

I just think it should stop at two shots and the ball.....and leave it at that....take the "ball at halfcourt" part out....

and to answer your last question, I have submitted this question to our local state rules interpreter and asked that it be passed on to NFHS and also to Peter Webb and the powers that be at IAABO as it appears according to the NFHS website that is how we are supposed to inquire....

nope I was the official working the game....and who answered inquiries afterwards about the reasoning behind "that part" of the rule.....

and the reason I came in here to ask the question.....because I didn't (and I still don't) have a good answer as to why we have to move the ball to half court after a technical....other than, thats just the way it is....

this situation got me to thinking how stupid it is that we automatically, no matter what, move it to half court.....thats what causes the problem...

if we just leave it where it was going to be thrown in, we don't have to answer these questions......

two shots and the ball....leave it at that

Eh, they can be unhappy all they want. They had a chance at 2 free points, after all.

did you not read the initial post/situation....in this situation who got "punished" by moving the ball to half court.....it sure as heck wasn't the team that got the T.....

Look, we do not care who won. We are not here to complain about what the rules should be for the most part. That is the rule. That is the way the rule has been for years and just because the rule is done different is not our concern.

Peace

So where would you have the ball thrown in on a technical against the head coach?

What you seem to be disappointed with is that nobody so far shares your view that this is a problem.

My explanation is always "That's the rule coach."

There are currently two ways play is resumed following technical fouls.

POI : This means whoever had the ball last gets it after the shots are done. NBA and NCAA use this for some of their free throws. It means the guilty team gets the ball sometimes, depending on what type of technical foul.

Ball at half court : Every technical foul, at every level, that is not adminstered with POI is done this way. NFHS has determined, to keep it simple (whether you buy it or not doesn't matter, that's their reasoning) and have all of them administered this way.

Making the change you suggest would mean, sometimes, a team would be put into a worse position. If the T was called prior to a throw in deep in the BC, then your change would send the ball back there. You're essentially asking that we take into consideration the location of the ball (or pending throw in) when the technical was called. This isn't POI, but a sort of hybrid.

Frankly, I can only imagine how badly this would screw up the rules if they were to make this change, but other than that, it's not an unreasonable change. It's just that it's essentially a solution in search of a problem.

You said it "cost" the team the game. That's what I object to. They had two free throws, with no one on the lane to distract them. If his best shooter can't even make one of those, he needs to redirect his anger. You say that doesn't matter, but it I disagree. As bob noted, two shots and the ball at half court is better than no shots and the ball on your own end line.

Only a coach who just had his best shooter miss two freebies would bother to complain about this, IMO.