Drake loses on a T to Weber State.

[ShockTalk]

How about, "I know I can get away with this, since it it toward the end of the game"......?

How about "As a player, I've always kept being able to this on my mind so that if the right opportunity came along I would do it eventhough, there's a 90% chance I'll get T'd and we'll lose the game".....?

:roll:

[LoneStar48]

Here's what a guy on the Drake forum found pertaining to rules on spiking the ball;

"Here's what I found in the rule book. Refs can't check the replay for judgement calls, so had to have been checking the time at the end of the game and not whether Hawley committed a technical. Here are the definitions of a technical. I still don't see how spiking the ball fits as a technical under these definitions unless it's taunting:"

"Section 5. (Men) CLASS A Unsporting Technical Infractions
Art. 1. A player or substitute committing an unsportsmanlike act including,
but not limited to, the following:
a. Disrespectfully addressing or contacting an official or gesturing in
such a manner as to indicate resentment.
b. Using profanity or vulgarity; taunting, baiting or ridiculing another
player or bench personnel; or pointing a finger at or making obscene
gestures toward another player or bench personnel.
c. Inciting undesirable crowd reaction.
d. Contacting an opponent, while the ball is dead, in an unnecessary,
unacceptable and excessive manner.
e. Flagrantly (severe or extreme) contacting an opponent while the ball
is dead.
f. A flagrant non-contact infraction that involves extreme, sometimes
persistent, vulgar, abusive conduct when the ball is dead or live.
g. Participating after having been disqualified (non-contact flagrant
technical).
h. Leaving the playing court and going into the stands when a fight may
break out or has broken out (flagrant non-contact infraction).
i. Fighting as in Rule 4-26.

Art. 2. Bench personnel committing an unsportsmanlike act including, but
not limited to, the following:
a. Disrespectfully addressing an official.
b. Attempting to influence an official’s decision.
c. Using profanity or language that is abusive, vulgar or obscene.
d. Taunting or baiting an opponent.
e. Objecting to an official’s decision by rising from the bench or using
gestures.
f. Inciting undesirable crowd reactions.
g. Fighting by bench personnel as in Rule 4-26.

Section 6. (Men) CLASS B TECHNICAL INFRACTIONS
Art. 1. A technical foul shall be assessed to a player or a substitute for the
following infractions:
a. Purposely obstructing an opponent’s vision by waving or placing
hand(s) near his eyes.
b. Climbing on or lifting a teammate to secure greater height.
c. Knowingly attempting a free throw to which he is not entitled.
d. Possessing or using tobacco.
e. A team member dunking or attempting to dunk a dead ball before or
during the game, or during any intermission.
f. Grasping either basket in an excessive, emphatic manner during the
officials’ jurisdiction when the player is not, in the judgment of an
official, trying to prevent an obvious injury to self or others.
g. Intentionally slapping or striking the backboard or causing either the
backboard or ring to vibrate while the ball is in flight during a try, or
while the ball is touching the backboard, is on the basket ring, in the
basket net or in the cylinder.
h. Placing a hand(s) on the backboard or ring to gain an advantage.
i. Touching a ball in flight (goaltending) during a free throw.
j. Reaching through the throw-in boundary-line plane and touching or
dislodging the ball while it is in possession of the thrower or being
passed to a teammate outside the boundary line as in Rule 7-5.6.b.
k. Deceptively leaving the playing court for an unauthorized reason and
returning at a more advantageous position.
l. Purposely delaying his return to the playing court after being legally
out of bounds.
m. After a team warning has been issued, attempting to gain an advantage
by interfering with the ball after a goal or failing to immediately pass
the ball to the nearest official after the whistle had been blown.
n. A team member entering the playing court without reporting to the
official scorers or a substitute entering the playing court without
being beckoned by an official (unless during an intermission).
o. Participating after changing his uniform number without reporting
the change to the official scorer and a game official.
p. Opponents of the thrower-in shall not repeatedly have any part of
their person beyond the vertical inside plane of any boundary line
before the ball has crossed that boundary line. (See Rule 9-5.3.)

Art. 2. A technical foul shall be assessed to the coach and all bench
personnel for the following infractions:
a. Entering the playing court unless done with permission of an official
to attend to an injured player.
b. Possessing or using tobacco.
c. Refusing to occupy the team bench to which the team was assigned
or to occupy the locations for a timeout or for the start of any period
as defined in Rule 4-7.2.
d. Using electronic transmission (e.g. headsets, cellular telephones,
modular telephones, television, radio, audio or video Internet
broadcast), or knowledge gained resulting from thereof, to
communicate to and from the bench area or using television monitors
or replay equipment at courtside for coaching purposes.
e. When there is evidence that the head coach or bench personnel
instructed for the scorebook to be removed from the scorer’s table.
f. All bench personnel shall remain seated on the bench while the ball
is live, except as follows:
1. The head coach who may stand but must remain completely and
clearly in his coaching box. One warning shall be issued to the
head coach before any subsequent infraction is penalized.
2. To spontaneously react to an outstanding play, immediately
sitting down on the bench afterwards.
3. A team member reporting to the scorer’s table.
4. To point out, at any time, a scoring or timing mistake or to request
a timeout to ascertain whether a correctable error needs to be
rectified. (See Rules 2-12 and 5-10.5.)
5. To seek information from the official scorer or official timer
during a timeout or an intermission.
g. The head coach shall replace a disqualified or injured player within
20 seconds when a substitute is available.
h. Delaying the game by preventing the ball from being promptly
made live or by preventing continuous play, such as bench personnel
entering the playing court before player activity has been terminated.
In such a case, when the delay does not interfere with play, it shall be
ignored.
i. Using a laser pointer.
j. Bench personnel leaving the bench area when a fight may break out
or has broken out. The head coach may leave the bench area in this
case to prevent the situation from escalating."

To me it is the ref's judgement to call or not. I don't think it should have been called because since there is no rule against it, the judgement does come into play, and that would mean the ref should take everything into consideration; was there a physical threat, was there cussing, was there verbal taunting, etc...

[SubGod22]

It's still an unsporting act and can easily be defended that way. That ball got a lot of air and could be seen as taunting. If you like it or not it isn't a stretch for the official to view it that way.

I did read thru the thread on MVCFans and got a kick out of Drake fans saying it barely cleared his head. He wouldn't have recieved a T if it had barely cleared his head.

[RoyalShock]

"Section 5. (Men) CLASS A Unsporting Technical Infractions
Art. 1. A player or substitute committing an unsportsmanlike act including,
but not limited to, the following:
a. Disrespectfully addressing or contacting an official or gesturing in
such a manner as to indicate resentment.

The bolded rule has probably been used to assess technicals on players who react to a call against them or their team with a "spike" of the ball.

It looks to me like the refs are clearly extending the rule beyond its clear definition. I see nothing there regarding mis-use of the ball or celebratory reactions.

Bad call.

[RoyalShock]

It's still an unsporting act and can easily be defended that way. That ball got a lot of air and could be seen as taunting. If you like it or not it isn't a stretch for the official to view it that way.

I did read thru the thread on MVCFans and got a kick out of Drake fans saying it barely cleared his head. He wouldn't have recieved a T if it had barely cleared his head.

I'm not sure how that even comes close to taunting. If that's the case, then players who throw the ball in the air at the end of a game before time expires should be assessed a technical.

[SubGod22]

It's still an unsporting act and can easily be defended that way. That ball got a lot of air and could be seen as taunting. If you like it or not it isn't a stretch for the official to view it that way.

I did read thru the thread on MVCFans and got a kick out of Drake fans saying it barely cleared his head. He wouldn't have recieved a T if it had barely cleared his head.

I'm not sure how that even comes close to taunting. If that's the case, then players who throw the ball in the air at the end of a game before time expires should be assessed a technical.

Maybe they should... Those are normally done after the horn and a T won't do anything when there's a 10 point lead and .3 seconds on the clock.

[Kung Wu]

"Section 5. (Men) CLASS A Unsporting Technical Infractions
Art. 1. A player or substitute committing an unsportsmanlike act including,
but not limited to, the following:
a. Disrespectfully addressing or contacting an official or gesturing in
such a manner as to indicate resentment.

The bolded rule has probably been used to assess technicals on players who react to a call against them or their team with a "spike" of the ball.

It looks to me like the refs are clearly extending the rule beyond its clear definition. I see nothing there regarding mis-use of the ball or celebratory reactions.

Bad call.

Respectfully disagree with you here.

Section 5. (Men) CLASS A Unsporting Technical Infractions
Art. 1. A player or substitute committing an unsportsmanlike act including,
but not limited to, the following:

There's the rub. Unsportsmanlike conduct in almost all sports is the ref's ace in the hole. If they see something that is unsportsmanlike, they can use their judgement to assess a penalty. And that's the way it should be. It is entirely impossible to enumerate every possible thing that is unsportsmanlike, yet nearly every fan knows it when they see it.

In the video the dude looks like he could have been fist pumping at an opponent prior to slamming the ball down (and not handing it over to the ref as per the rules). The ref may have ignored the fist pump as not being targeted, but then combined with not handing the ball over and slamming it down, it may have just come off wrong in real time.

Plus do we know the player wasn't chewing tobacco?

[Kung Wu]

It's still an unsporting act and can easily be defended that way. That ball got a lot of air and could be seen as taunting. If you like it or not it isn't a stretch for the official to view it that way.

I did read thru the thread on MVCFans and got a kick out of Drake fans saying it barely cleared his head. He wouldn't have recieved a T if it had barely cleared his head.

I'm not sure how that even comes close to taunting. If that's the case, then players who throw the ball in the air at the end of a game before time expires should be assessed a technical.

Couldn't that be considered a reasonable strategy for burning a few seconds off the clock without risking turning it over?

[ShockTalk]

How about beating of the chest, pulling on one's jersey, or loud, menacing yell (think JT here)? Most all of this goes on during a game. Taunting? Does a ref just make the rules up as he goes and apply unwritten ones when the whim suits?

Yes, the kid should have realized the high possibility of a T. That doesn't change the point of this discussion. I think it was a poor decision regarding a judgement call where, almost all the time, such an action has a much different meaning than it had here.

And the Geese poster needs a new glasses perscription.

[RoyalShock]

"Section 5. (Men) CLASS A Unsporting Technical Infractions
Art. 1. A player or substitute committing an unsportsmanlike act including,
but not limited to, the following:
a. Disrespectfully addressing or contacting an official or gesturing in
such a manner as to indicate resentment.

The bolded rule has probably been used to assess technicals on players who react to a call against them or their team with a "spike" of the ball.

It looks to me like the refs are clearly extending the rule beyond its clear definition. I see nothing there regarding mis-use of the ball or celebratory reactions.

Bad call.

Respectfully disagree with you here.

Section 5. (Men) CLASS A Unsporting Technical Infractions
Art. 1. A player or substitute committing an unsportsmanlike act including,
but not limited to, the following:

There's the rub. Unsportsmanlike conduct in almost all sports is the ref's ace in the hole. If they see something that is unsportsmanlike, they can use their judgement to assess a penalty. And that's the way it should be. It is entirely impossible to enumerate every possible thing that is unsportsmanlike, yet nearly every fan knows it when they see it.

In the video the dude looks like he could have been fist pumping at an opponent prior to slamming the ball down (and not handing it over to the ref as per the rules). The ref may have ignored the fist pump as not being targeted, but then combined with not handing the ball over and slamming it down, it may have just come off wrong in real time.

Plus do we know the player wasn't chewing tobacco?

Ok, I missed that, so I back off my statement. Thanks for bringing that to light.

On your second point, I'm now convinced he had a pinch between the cheek and gum. And did anyone look to see if there was a 3 to 4-inch diameter imprint in the back of his shorts?

[ShockTalk]

Kung, you make an excellent point. However, was it unsportsman like? Apparently the player running down the court, yelling, jumping, and pumping his fist in the air was OK. My point is that spiking the ball appears to be an automatic T, eventhough, no rule says so. How is what one player did with the ball any more unsportsman like than the other kid? Both should be taken in the context of the situation.

When I ran the video slow, I was glad to see that the ref appeared to make the call before it was pointed out by the Weber St player. I do feel pity for the Weber player, however, as I'd hate to win a game that way.

[WuDrWu]

How about beating of the chest, pulling on one's jersey, or loud, menacing yell (think JT here)? Most all of this goes on during a game. Taunting? Does a ref just make the rules up as he goes and apply unwritten ones when the whim suits?

Yes, the kid should have realized the high possibility of a T. That doesn't change the point of this discussion. I think it was a poor decision regarding a judgement call where, almost all the time, such an action has a much different meaning than it had here.

And the Geese poster needs a new glasses perscription.

:yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo:

[SubGod22]

There are also accepted celebratory actions that aren't going to be called. Slamming the ball down hasn't been one as far as I know.

Personally, I'd have no problem if they decided to clean up the game by taking away all the chest beating antics and screaming. But the NCAA has apparently cleared those as acceptable for the time being.

I really don't care much about this call either way, just trying to provide the other perspective.

[SHOXAAC]

There are 4 or 5 poster on this thread that have been very adamant about using the rules, or perceived rules, as to justify the T against the Drake player. These posters seem to validate the call do to the clear black & white action of the player.

According to the "rule book," a T is issued to players/assistant coaches rising from the bench, or using gestures to object to an officials decision. Isn't this black & white?

Dunking a dead ball before, during or at intermission. I saw one of our players (can't remember which one) do this last night. Isn't this black & white.

A head coach can not enter the playing court unless done with an officials permission to attend to an injured player.

A head coach is the only bench personnel that can stand on the sideline, but must remain completely in coaches box (1 warning).

Come on people, even in black & white situations, there is judgement by game officials. The Drake player should not have bounced the ball. There appeared to be no negative or critical intent, just like not Ting up a coach that wanders out of the coaching box. Let's all use the good sense that was given to us (probably a stretch for some of us, me included) and move on!!!

[SubGod22]

I don't recall seeing any of our players "dunk" before the game or at half time. They play above the rim but do not grab the rim. That's where the difference is there.

Very little in basketball is black and white. A lot of it is gray. Still, this ball was bounced pretty high so I don't have a major problem with the call. It was stupid and the kid should not have done it and put himself and his team in a position to be punished for his actions. Just because it's at the end of the game doesn't make anything less or more of a penalty. Or it shouldn't anyway. I know some officials will officiate differently at the end...