Who do you get.
 

Did a game last night.VG -

Background - Visting team is a train wreck. Perennial local powerhouse that is just having a year where they've fallen off the map. Talent isnt' there, coaching is sub par, its a train wreck. Complicated by the fact they are in a game where H is unusually strong and H is dominating. Up 30 at half. Vteam/coaches has always had rep for being whinny, argumentative anyway but now they are just a mess.

Coach gets a T early in the second quarter just for accumulation of BS. Seems like every call against his kids or no call we are getting wrong. Talked to, warned, stop signed- well deserved T. Claps once walks away, didn't actually say anything else the rest of the night. But now everyone else is in on it.

Kids are arguing calls, bench is complaining. Before the end of the 2nd quarter we've given an indirect to the bench and T'd up 1 player on the floor.

So coming into the 2nd half we know whats been going on and hope V just lets it go and finishes the game but if not we have to take care of buisness.

They come out coach is again not saying a word, but same stuff happens from kids. We T up a player early in the 3rd, coach sends a sub to the table for her. Even after tech and with coach telling her to not worry about it she continues to talk on the way to the bench, as she's subbed out. Partner gives her another one. At this point she has been subbed out. 2nd indirect to coach plus original T. Coach is gone (though he's been the most reasonable - not difficult though since his T). Assitant coach is now irate. She gets T'd too. Eventually they call timeout. Kids who have been T'd sit rest of the game. Assistant now running the show just empties bench and lets it end. H team wins by close to 40. No more incidents.

My question isnt' so much about how we handled things though if we got something wrong let me know.

More in the case of the player being T'd and then subbed out by her coach in general. Shes out of control coach is trying to get her off the floor and deal with it. If it continues and you have to T her again would you try to get it on her before she leaves the floor, or just live with the fact that shes going out the game and if it doesn't stop it will become a bench T.

Sounds like a YHTBT but some games you just gotta whack everyone. I don't know about trying to whack a player before she becomes bench personnel, I guess you could do it earlier if you know the coach is one indirect away from an ejection but you can't decide when the player will mouth off. Kinda sucks that the coach was ejected even though his behaviour improved, but if he doesn't take care of his team so they don't continue I guess he deserves it.

"Coach, you have to calm her down or get her out of here. If she gets one more T, by rule, you have to leave."

No need to extend that game any longer, let that player take her seat on the bench and allow the game to end. From your description it sounded like th game was long over, no need for you to experience additional stress. I'd have just let the game end--the pounding by the other team served as the further 'punishment'. Man, sorry you had to experience such:mad:

So just because a team is getting worked our job changes? I mean we can maybe alter advantage/disadvantage somewhat but letting ass-hats act like ass-hats because the game is over is a joke.

Why? She already received 1 T. This is a varsity game, the coach shouldn't need a reminder from us to get his players under control in this circumstance. I personally wouldn't add this.

I agree with this. I think sometimes people forget this is high school we're dealing with. Kids don't get to behave like morons and get away with it just because the game is a blowout. The coach had plenty of opportunities when the other T's were handed out to players to call a timeout and demand the kids change their behavior. Players have much less rope for me than coaches. I have no tolerance for BS from players.

I'm not counting on the coach knowing about direct and indirect Ts. This particular group sounds ignorant enough already, and probably wasn't even aware of the indirect T. While I agree with the "no time for a clinic" mentality, it doesn't hurt to let a coach know where she stands, especially with unusual circumstances such as this.

There is also the school of thought that it's better for them to "learn their lesson" in a game where the T doesn't really cost them anything -- it doesn't matter whether they lose by 38 or by 40.

It might help them in a close game to keep their composure.

I assume you mean you T'd someone on the bench, which resulted in an indirect to the head coach?

These two takes should not be taken lightly. High school basketball is an educational environment. Like it or not, officials play a role in that. Lessons that players learn in games shape them for life. Being held accountable for one's own actions is a life lesson that should not be withheld from the player simply due to the score of a game.

Given how the OP describe the situation, I'd probably have handled it exactly the way the OP did.

With that said, when I wrote up my incident report to the state (required when there's a player or coach ejection), I'd make a note that the coach was attempting to calm down the situation when the (unavoidable) 3rd indirect T was issued.

Maybe it helps his case when the state decides if coach needs to be suspended for the next game... maybe not (after all, there were several opportunities to avoid the first direct T and first indirect T).

I have the same question. Who was charged with the direct T which resulted in the first indirect to the coach? You cannot just charge an indirect T by itself to bench personnel. You need a specific offender. If it is a collective action such as multiple substitutes standing when not permitted, there is still a TEAM technical foul which is assessed resulting in the indirect to the coach. Indirects never exist totally on their own under high school rules.

Do you? If you're C right in front of the bench, and someone on the bench behind you says something derogatory that's very worthy of a T, but you can't say with absolutely certainty which kid said it, you should still have a T.

Yes, you need a specific offender. All indirects MUST have a direct called somewhere. You can not have an indirect without a direct. The two are tied together. That offender, however, can be identified as the "TEAM".

Fair enough, and I guess that's what I meant. I thought Nevada was saying that you cannot call a T (even a team T) without a specific offender unless it is a collective team act