NFHS altercation penalties question

billyu2

Camron Rust wrote
Agree with your point on item 3. Since the fouls were not against each other, it can't be a double. It could be considered simultaneous, however. That would have the same net effect (offset/POI).

For me, it would depend on the time between the two events. If close (within a second or so) I'm calling them simultaneous. If not that close, I'm calling them two independent infractions and FTs would be shot for each, in the order of occurrence.

As for something from the NFHS regarding what offsets...see

Rule 10 Penalty Summary No. 8. Fighting:

Someone has cited this section here: https://bsbproduction.s3.amazonaws.com/portals/4953/docs/fight-rule.pdf

They clearly separate the penalties for players involved and non-players involved.

What type of "infraction" are you calling in this situation? Non-flagrant or flagrant? The OP says we have an "altercation" which subsequently results in the coach coming on the floor to control his players. If the officials define this to be a "fighting" situation, the rule you cite clearly says no free throws are awarded. If the fouls are not flagrant, I agree with your statement.

bob jenkins

Nevadaref wrote
The NFHS rules seem unclear for the penalties when an altercation occurs.

Agrees, as we've discussed before.

I'd like to see all of these offset (to the extent there's an equal number) and not need to worry about the specific timing or whether it's a player or bench personnel involved. And, in fact, that's the way it has been taught, here (at least a couple of years ago; I haven't seen a recent "official" presentation on this, but I don't think the rule has changed).

It doesn't make much difference in this play, since the foul by A7 is the "odd man out."

Camron Rust

billyu2 wrote
What type of "infraction" are you calling in this situation? Non-flagrant or flagrant? The OP says we have an "altercation" which subsequently results in the coach coming on the floor to control his players. If the officials define this to be a "fighting" situation, the rule you cite clearly says no free throws are awarded. If the fouls are not flagrant, I agree with your statement.

The action by the players on the court may or may not be a fight....that is judgement. As described, I'm probably not calling it a fight.

BillyMac

Camron Rust wrote
The action by the players on the court may or may not be a fight....that is judgement. As described, I'm probably not calling it a fight.

NFHS 4-18: Fighting is a flagrant act and can occur when the ball is dead or live.
Fighting includes, but is not limited to combative acts such as:
ART. 1 An attempt to strike, punch or kick by using a fist, hands, arms,
legs or feet regardless of whether contact is made.
ART. 2 An attempt to instigate a fight by committing an unsporting act
that causes a person to retaliate by fighting.

BigCat

Nevadaref wrote
The NFHS rules seem unclear for the penalties when an altercation occurs.
Does anyone have a definitive answer as to which penalties can offset?

For example, A1 has the ball and is dribbling in the lane where he is fouled by B1. After the whistle, A1 and B1 face off nose to nose and exchange words, but don’t have any physical contact. B2 comes running from near the division line and forcefully shoves A1 with both forearms. A4 takes both hands and shoves B2 away from his teammate. A7 comes off his team bench and shoves B4. At this point the coaches come onto the court and remove their respective players.

At the time of the play Team A had committed six fouls in the half and Team B had committed eight.
Please list the fouls which you would assess and which FTs would be attempted and which would offset.

1. A1 is fouled and entitled to one and bonus.
2. Then Double Ts for A1 and B 1. Not fighting though. They offset.
3. B2 shoves A1 w forearms.. He gets a T for sure but Id need to see it to call it flagrant. 2 shots for A.
4. A4 gets a T for shoving B2 away from his teammate. 2 shots for B.
A7 comes off the bench.... and participates in fight. He is ejected. Coach given indirect and regardless of what you do with the players in the game B will get two FTs because of this.

So. A1 shoots bonus. Then Any A player shoots 2 for b2 shove to forearm.
Then B shoots 2 for A4 shove and 2 more for A7 coming off bench and fighting. B gets ball opposite table.

BigCat

The case plays and summaries make clear that 1. You penalize players on court as you always would.
2. If players leave the bench and the number is equal from both side, no FTs will be shot. If 2 As leave bench and fight and 2 Bs leave bench and don’t participate there will be no FTs. However, coach of A gets 2 indirects for his players leaving and fighting. B coach gets one.)

BigCat

Moral of story—/Don’t have fights...🙃

SC Official

BigCat wrote
The case plays and summaries make clear that 1. You penalize players on court as you always would.
2. If players leave the bench and the number is equal from both side, no FTs will be shot. If 2 As leave bench and fight and 2 Bs leave bench and don’t participate there will be no FTs. However, coach of A gets 2 indirects for his players leaving and fighting. B coach gets one.)

(2) is not true. Fight participants and non-participants are treated differently. They don't offset each other.

BigCat

billyu2 wrote
What type of "infraction" are you calling in this situation? Non-flagrant or flagrant? The OP says we have an "altercation" which subsequently results in the coach coming on the floor to control his players. If the officials define this to be a "fighting" situation, the rule you cite clearly says no free throws are awarded. If the fouls are not flagrant, I agree with your statement.

Coaches are not relevant any longer. (Assuming they’re not swinging etc)However, in past days they would be bench personnel. Count number from each side. If equal- NO FTs. If some of those fight the penalty was more indirects to coach and he is ejected.

The number leaving the bench determines if FTs are shot for those infractions. You have to figure out players on court stuff based on what they do. 2 seaoarate procedures. We don’t mix and match and offset all....
HOWEVER, if you did there’d only be a handful on planet who’d know if it was done correctly..

SNIPERBBB

BigCat wrote
The case plays and summaries make clear that 1. You penalize players on court as you always would.
2. If players leave the bench and the number is equal from both side, no FTs will be shot. If 2 As leave bench and fight and 2 Bs leave bench and don’t participate there will be no FTs. However, coach of A gets 2 indirects for his players leaving and fighting. B coach gets one.)

Only one player in the OP comes off the bench....

BigCat

SNIPERBBB wrote
Only one player in the OP comes off the bench....

Yes, I know. Was giving a further interp...

billyu2

BigCat wrote
1. A1 is fouled and entitled to one and bonus.
2. Then Double Ts for A1 and B 1. Not fighting though. They offset.
3. B2 shoves A1 w forearms.. He gets a T for sure but Id need to see it to call it flagrant. 2 shots for A.
4. A4 gets a T for shoving B2 away from his teammate. 2 shots for B.
A7 comes off the bench.... and participates in fight. He is ejected. Coach given indirect and regardless of what you do with the players in the game B will get two FTs because of this.

So. A1 shoots bonus. Then Any A player shoots 2 for b2 shove to forearm.
Then B shoots 2 for A4 shove and 2 more for A7 coming off bench and fighting. B gets ball opposite table.

What fight? If you're giving just giving T's to the players there was no fight. Yes, A7 gets ejected for coming off the bench and shoving B4 but according to your answer there was no fight.

billyu2

BigCat wrote
Coaches are not relevant any longer. (Assuming they’re not swinging etc)However, in past days they would be bench personnel. Count number from each side. If equal- NO FTs. If some of those fight the penalty was more indirects to coach and he is ejected.

The number leaving the bench determines if FTs are shot for those infractions. You have to figure out players on court stuff based on what they do. 2 seaoarate procedures. We don’t mix and match and offset all....
HOWEVER, if you did there’d only be a handful on planet who’d know if it was done correctly..

You missed my point. If the "altercation" on the floor was such that one or both coaches had to come out on the floor to help get things under control (which is allowed) then a good case could be made this was indeed a fight.

billyu2

BigCat wrote
1. A1 is fouled and entitled to one and bonus.
2. Then Double Ts for A1 and B 1. Not fighting though. They offset.
3. B2 shoves A1 w forearms.. He gets a T for sure but Id need to see it to call it flagrant. 2 shots for A.
4. A4 gets a T for shoving B2 away from his teammate. 2 shots for B.
A7 comes off the bench.... and participates in fight. He is ejected. Coach given indirect and regardless of what you do with the players in the game B will get two FTs because of this.

So. A1 shoots bonus. Then Any A player shoots 2 for b2 shove to forearm.
Then B shoots 2 for A4 shove and 2 more for A7 coming off bench and fighting. B gets ball opposite table.

Why do you say A7 was fighting? He didn't do anything different than B2 and A4 according to your answer. A7 is going to be ejected for entering the court whether he ends up shoving someone or not. 10-12-8b

Camron Rust

billyu2 wrote
What fight? If you're giving just giving T's to the players there was no fight. Yes, A7 gets ejected for coming off the bench and shoving B4 but according to your answer there was no fight.

A7 doesn't have to be fighting. Bench personnel are treated as if they were fighting when they leave the bench in a situation where a fight may break occur, even if it doesn't. Otherwise, we'd just give A7 a T and not DQ A7.

Rule 10-5-5: Leave the confines of the bench during a fight or when a fight may occur.

PENALTY: (Art. 5) Flagrant foul, disqualification of individual offender, but only one technical-foul penalty is administered regardless of the number of offenders.

Nevadaref

BigCat wrote
The case plays and summaries make clear that 1. You penalize players on court as you always would.
2. If players leave the bench and the number is equal from both side, no FTs will be shot. If 2 As leave bench and fight and 2 Bs leave bench and don’t participate there will be no FTs. However, coach of A gets 2 indirects for his players leaving and fighting. B coach gets one.)

I don’t believe that you are correct on your penalties for team members leaving the bench. Care to double-check?

billyu2

Camron Rust wrote
A7 doesn't have to be fighting. Bench personnel are treated as if they were fighting when they leave the bench in a situation where a fight may break occur, even if it doesn't. Otherwise, we'd just give A7 a T and not DQ A7.

Agree. Exactly what I said in my post just before yours. I didn't mean or need to include "and shoving B4" in that other post. Should have edited that out.

BigCat

Nevadaref wrote
I don’t believe that you are correct on your penalties for team members leaving the bench. Care to double-check?

The fight rules/plays say that if the number leaving the bench when there’s a fight or one could breakout is equal then no free throws will be shot. There are case plays where 2 As leave bench and don’t participate. 2 bs leave but one does participate in fight.
You would think because a B participated there’d be more FTs. Not the case. No free throws because number leaving bench same. The penalty is head coach indirect for player leaving bench and one more for player participating.

BigCat

billyu2 wrote
Why do you say A7 was fighting? He didn't do anything different than B2 and A4 according to your answer. A7 is going to be ejected for entering the court whether he ends up shoving someone or not. 10-12-8b

Player on court might shove each other. If have to see that before declaring it a fight. A7 comes off of the bench. Has no business being there. And he shoves someone. You can say he participates or actually starts fight.

It is strange but rule/cases are pretty clear. There is a difference in penalizing if player just comes off bench or comes off and participates.
If 3 blue come off bench and don’t fight and 3 white come off bench and do fight...Players leaving bench are equal and be no FTs. However, blue gets one indirect T because he had 3 players leave Bench.
White team coach gets 3 indirects because he had 3 leave bench and participate. No FTs but white team coach is ejected. (3 indirect T)
You would think blue get more FTs because, while there players came off bench, they didn’t participate. Not what rule says. Coach is penalized w more indirects when bench player comes off AND participates.

BigCat

billyu2 wrote
You missed my point. If the "altercation" on the floor was such that one or both coaches had to come out on the floor to help get things under control (which is allowed) then a good case could be made this was indeed a fight.

I wouldn’t declare that whatever happened on floor was a fight just because coaches came out. Coaches can come out to prevent one. A7 leaving bench, moment he does he’s ejected because one could have broken out. When he shoves somebody, being a bench player, I think he is participating in or starting fight.