ouch...talk about losing your cool...

NM_Ref

What a way to lose...practice will definately not be fun tomorrow.

Nevadaref

The PIAA does a good job of stating that the officials kicked the rule and the school does a great thing in acknowledging that their actions were totally wrong and that they need to learn from that.

For the record, a maximum of two FTs can be awarded no matter how many team members leave the bench during an altercation as long as none of them engage in the fight. If they participate, then each is penalized with 2 FTs. These FTs could be offset by whatever penalties are handed out to the opposing team if they also enter the court.

PS In NV we have a bench-clearing rule that states if three or more individuals leave the bench, then the game is over and that team forfeits. If both teams do so, then the contest is ruled a double-forfeit.

Jurassic Referee

Nevadaref wrote
The PIAA does a good job of stating that the officials kicked the rule and the school does a great thing in acknowledging that their actions were totally wrong and that they need to learn from that.

For the record, a maximum of two FTs can be awarded no matter how many team members leave the bench during an altercation as long as none of them engage in the fight. If they participate, then each is penalized with 2 FTs. These FTs could be offset by whatever penalties are handed out to the opposing team if they also enter the court.

PS In NV we have a bench-clearing rule that states if three or more individuals leave the bench, then the game is over and that team forfeits. If both teams do so, then the contest is ruled a double-forfeit.

Howinthe hell can you possibly know that the officials actually kicked the rule? The description of the play said "the players and the assistant coach joined the fray." If they actually "joined the fray", then maybe they were "participants" and the issuing of 12 FT's was the correct call, by rule. In situations like this, I usually like to hear the official's story also. I'm kinda funny like that.

I also fail to see where the PIAA did anything, according to the story posted. All I can see is a possibly biased account given by the AD of the team that had 6 people come off the bench.

Maybe the officials actually did screw it up. It's still never a good idea to rely solely on what a fanboy AD is saying.

Nevadaref

Yep, you are right. The story doesn't say that an official from the PIAA called and discussed the error, it says that it was the head official from the game! 😮 I blitzed through that too quickly.

"Tuesday morning, DeRenzo received a phone call from the head official of Monday’s night game, and got a clarification on the error that was made."

It still seems that the rule was kicked.

Jurassic Referee

Nevadaref wrote
"Tuesday morning, DeRenzo received a phone call from the head official of Monday’s night game, and got a clarification on the error that was made."

That was my point. DeRenzo is the AD and he is the one that is saying that an error was made. Could be, but suspicious ol' me learned a long time ago to get both sides of a story before forming an opinion. Imo, the jury is still out on this one.

I took a quick look at the PIAA website. It says that ejection reports have to be handed in for all regular season games, and anybody ejected- coach or player- has to sit out a minimum of one more game. Soooooo, the story said that it wasn't a league game, but was it considered a regular season game? Maybe somebody from Pa. can enlighten us. If so, the 5 players and the assistant coach should be getting a vacation.

Mark Dexter

From the AD: "DeRenzo pointed out that three ejections and three technical fouls is the most that can be dished out on one whistle, according to his interpretation of the PIAA basketball rules."

As soon as I read this, I questioned the accuracy of the rest of the AD's claim.

As JR pointed out, if 6 people come off the bench and all participate in the melee, I have 12 free throws for the other team.

bob jenkins

Mark Dexter wrote
From the AD: "DeRenzo pointed out that three ejections and three technical fouls is the most that can be dished out on one whistle, according to his interpretation of the PIAA basketball rules."

As soon as I read this, I questioned the accuracy of the rest of the AD's claim.

It's the modern-day equivalent of "three on a match."

Ref in PA

Jurassic Referee wrote
I took a quick look at the PIAA website. It says that ejection reports have to be handed in for all regular season games, and anybody ejected- coach or player- has to sit out a minimum of one more game. Soooooo, the story said that it wasn't a league game, but was it considered a regular season game? Maybe somebody from Pa. can enlighten us. If so, the 5 players and the assistant coach should be getting a vacation.

To my knowledge, all HS in PIAA belong to some conference or league, based on the size and geographic location of the school. League play usually begins towards the end of December with teams playing each other twice. Prior to league play are games sometimes referred to as exhibition games. These games count as regular season games, but are not part of the league standings. There are some HS out there that are not part of the PIAA for some reason or another. Most are religious schools. I also seem to remember that some HS in Philly were not part of the PIAA in certain sports.

To answer the second question: Ejected players and coaches must sit out a game at the same level and the refs have to fill out paperwork with the PIAA asap.

Ref in PA

Mark Dexter wrote
From the AD: "DeRenzo pointed out that three ejections and three technical fouls is the most that can be dished out on one whistle, according to his interpretation of the PIAA basketball rules."

As soon as I read this, I questioned the accuracy of the rest of the AD's claim.

As JR pointed out, if 6 people come off the bench and all participate in the melee, I have 12 free throws for the other team.

I have never heard of a max in my 11 years of officiating. I have seen the PIAA cave and not enforce the rules. A few years ago a fight broke out in the State Championship game which left 3 players from one team and 4 from the other as non participants in the fight. The refs wanted to continue like that, but the PIAA overseer at the game overruled the officials and only one player was ejected - the star player for one of the teams. What happened was A1 was given a throw-in in front of B's bench. B6 kicked his leg up between the legs of A1 during the throw-in. Fight ensued. A1 was the only player ejected and the next year we got a policy to never administer a throw-in in front of an opposing team's bench.

jdw3018

Ref in PA wrote
I have never heard of a max in my 11 years of officiating.

The only "max" is that if the players left the confines of the bench but did not participate in the fight, then each offender is charged with a flagrant foul and disqualified, but only one technical-foul penalty is administered regardless of the number. Also an indirect to the head coach.

If any person participates in the fight, then they are charged a flagrant technical each, plus one technical for any other bench personnel that leave the bench.

Does that make sense?

Dan_ref

Hold on. What about this from the article:

Tuesday morning, DeRenzo received a phone call from the head official of Monday’s night game, and got a clarification on the error that was made.

So you PA guys...why would an official contact an AD to 'clarify' an error? And what might that error be?

kbilla

Dan_ref wrote
Hold on. What about this from the article:

So you PA guys...why would an official contact an AD to 'clarify' an error? And what might that error be?

The only "error" I can think of if he did in fact get a call from the head official is that they issued techs for each and every non-participant who left the bench which would be wrong per NF....I find this hard to believe that a crew of varsity officials would kick this rule as big as it is, but anything is possible...good question though, I can't ever envision contacting an AD directly, maybe my assignor would after discussing the issue with the referee on the game, but that's about it...

Jurassic Referee

kbilla wrote
The only "error" I can think of if he did in fact get a call from the head official is that they issued techs for each and every non-participant who left the bench which would be wrong per NF....I find this hard to believe that a crew of varsity officials would kick this rule as big as it is, but anything is possible....

Say what?

By rule, they were supposed to issue flagrant technical fouls to everybody that left the bench, whether they participated in the fight or not. No matter, what, the 5 players and assistant coach were ejected for those flagrant technical fouls. The difference is in the penalties for the technical fouls for participants and non-participants. For non-participants, it's a max of 2 free throws. For participants, it's 2 free throws for everybody that participates and doesn't match up with someone on the other team.

Rule 10-6PENALTY SUMMARY8(b) 1&2 on p.67.

Iow, that can't be the supposed "error".

kbilla

Jurassic Referee wrote
Say what?

By rule, they were supposed to issue flagrant technical fouls to everybody that left the bench, whether they participated in the fight or not. No matter, what, the 5 players and assistant coach were ejected for those flagrant technical fouls. The difference is in the penalties for the technical fouls for participants and non-participants. For non-participants, it's a max of 2 free throws. For participants, it's 2 free throws for everybody that participates and doesn't match up with someone on the other team.

Rule 10-6PENALTY SUMMARY8(b) 1&2 on p.67.

Iow, that can't be the supposed "error".

You are correct, I meant to say that you don't SHOOT the techs for every non-participant, but you do issue the flagrant techs, sorry for the misstatement....so going back to OP, if the AD did in fact get a call from the R, if he admitted a mistake, that is the only mistake that I can think of, that they shot techs for every non-participant...

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I knocked on wood (my head for those who want to know) before I started this post and I will knock on wood as soon as I hit the submit button when I finish this post.

1) The A.D.'s statement were self-serving and I do not believe a word he said about his conversation with the "head official" later that evening.

2) I have been watching basketball games for over 45 years and it is my belief that no bench personnel leaves the bench just to watch a fight. They leave the bench to join the fight.

3) This is my 37th year as a basketball official and only once (boys' H.S. varsity, 1983-84 season) have I had bench personnel leave the bench to join the fight which actually started when fans from both schools entered the court to start fighting with the players immediately after I had called an intentional foul on H1 (H = home team). The foul occured with only about 20 seconds (I don't remember the exact amount left in the game, I don't feel like climbing up into the attic to find my game report) left in the game so my partner, who was the R, and I decided that the best thing to do was to declare the game over.

4) Based upon Item (3), you know why I am knocking on wood agains as soon as I hit the submit button.

MTD, Sr.

kbilla

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. wrote
I knocked on wood (my head for those who want to know) before I started this post and I will knock on wood as soon as I hit the submit button when I finish this post.

1) The A.D.'s statement were self-serving and I do not believe a word he said about his conversation with the "head official" later that evening.

2) I have been watching basketball games for over 45 years and it is my belief that no bench personnel leaves the bench just to watch a fight. They leave the bench to join the fight.

3) This is my 37th year as a basketball official and only once (boys' H.S. varsity, 1983-84 season) have I had bench personnel leave the bench to join the fight which actually started when fans from both schools entered the court to start fighting with the players immediately after I had called an intentional foul on H1 (H = home team). The foul occured with only about 20 seconds (I don't remember the exact amount left in the game, I don't feel like climbing up into the attic to find my game report) left in the game so my partner, who was the R, and I decided that the best thing to do was to declare the game over.

4) Based upon Item (3), you know why I am knocking on wood agains as soon as I hit the submit button.

MTD, Sr.

While I agree with you on 2), the distinction that should be made IMO is that you don't penalize "intent", you penalize the act in this case. Regardless of why they leave the bench, if they somehow come to their senses between the time they leave the bench and reach the fracas, if they don't participate, then you can only penalize them for leaving the bench...either way they are gone, but it still matters in terms of adding up the FT's....

kbilla

This actually leads to an intersting question though, how do you define "participates"? If he pulls a teammate off of the pile did he participate? What if he pulls an opponent off? I realize at that point you are gonna have your hands full and honestly if someone put their hands on someone else, ESPECIALLY an opponent, I am probably going to charge them with participating, but how do you all define "participating"?

Jurassic Referee

kbilla wrote
This actually leads to an intersting question though, how do you define "participates"? If he pulls a teammate off of the pile did he participate? What if he pulls an opponent off? I realize at that point you are gonna have your hands full and honestly if someone put their hands on someone else, ESPECIALLY an opponent, I am probably going to charge them with participating, but how do you all define "participating"?

Any kind of contact with an opponent.

Adam

From the AD: "DeRenzo pointed out that three ejections and three technical fouls is the most that can be dished out on one whistle, according to his interpretation of the PIAA basketball rules."

This is what happens when some coaches and ADs try to interpret the rules all by themselves.

tmp44

Jurassic Referee wrote
That was my point. DeRenzo is the AD and he is the one that is saying that an error was made. Could be, but suspicious ol' me learned a long time ago to get both sides of a story before forming an opinion. Imo, the jury is still out on this one.

I took a quick look at the PIAA website. It says that ejection reports have to be handed in for all regular season games, and anybody ejected- coach or player- has to sit out a minimum of one more game. Soooooo, the story said that it wasn't a league game, but was it considered a regular season game? Maybe somebody from Pa. can enlighten us. If so, the 5 players and the assistant coach should be getting a vacation.

Any player/coach ejected in a PIAA contest is suspended for the next play date. So yes, the coach and the 5 players would all be getting a day off. The PIAA actually changed the rule this year regarding suspensions. It used to be that the player ejection in a game was suspended for any game at any level the remainder of that day (e.g. a JV/V player ejected in the JV game was also done for the V game) and the next game at the level ejected at (so JV/V player would be done for the next JV game, but not the next varsity). Now, the ejected player/coach is done for the rest of the day ejected, plus the entire next play date at all levels. There is some debate about what happens if the JVs and Vs play on different dates.

As far as league vs. regular season game. Each district in PA is divided into sections/conferences/leagues depending on what part of the state you are in. Here in the Western part of the state, most teams play a 14 game section/conference schedule, and approx. 8-10 non-section/exhibition games, which are regular season games, but do not ultimately count towards qualification for playoffs (but do count for seedings).