Was it on Madsen? Not explained at tbe game
Go Bears!
Post Reply
1 of 1
Explain the technical foul
1,250 Views |
12 Replies |
Last: 9 mo ago by oskidunker
It looked like the refs were pointing to an assistant coach.oskidunker said:
Was it on Madsen? Not explained at tbe game
Was on an assistant, either for arguing a non-call, or entering the court, or both. Apparently they had already been warned, so might have just been a sideline violation, but the argument was that U$C committed a backcourt violation. While you are allowed to throw from the sideline into the backcourt for an inbound, I think the argument is that some/or part of the U$C player receiving the ball was in the front court when it was released by the inbounder, or when it was first touched by the receiving player. Have no idea what the rule is for inbounding. Does the player have to be completely behind the midcourt line when first touching a back-courted ball? Was he? It was a really close one.
Yeah, if a T then why no free throws? Of course, Walton and Robinson couldn't be bothered to explain.bearsandgiants said:
Was on an assistant, either for arguing a non-call, or entering the court, or both. Apparently they had already been warned, so might have just been a sideline violation, but the argument was that U$C committed a backcourt violation. While you are allowed to throw from the sideline into the backcourt for an inbound, I think the argument is that some/or part of the U$C player receiving the ball was in the front court when it was released by the inbounder, or when it was first touched by the receiving player. Have no idea what the rule is for inbounding. Does the player have to be completely behind the midcourt line when first touching a back-courted ball? Was he? It was a really close one.
Refs were abysmal but that's standard. I can handle bad contact calls. But this Tech was called by an official the furthest from the bench, literally the opposite side of the court during a LOUD game. Talk about sensitive.
Just another case of Pac-12 refs making themselves a part of the game. They will stop the game anytime a player is in pain and review it. Only see that with Pac-12 refs. Usually coaches just... sub out? Cone got them to stop the game and review a possible foul. They also stopped the game after Cone's huge 3 at the end when he was CLEARLY behind the line. This killed the crowd noise which would have carried over to USC's critical last possession. Sooo many unnecessary stoppages last night.
Just another case of Pac-12 refs making themselves a part of the game. They will stop the game anytime a player is in pain and review it. Only see that with Pac-12 refs. Usually coaches just... sub out? Cone got them to stop the game and review a possible foul. They also stopped the game after Cone's huge 3 at the end when he was CLEARLY behind the line. This killed the crowd noise which would have carried over to USC's critical last possession. Sooo many unnecessary stoppages last night.
I'm pretty sure U$C got free throws after the T was called on the call bench.Civil Bear said:Yeah, if a T then why no free throws? Of course, Walton and Robinson couldn't be bothered to explain.bearsandgiants said:
Was on an assistant, either for arguing a non-call, or entering the court, or both. Apparently they had already been warned, so might have just been a sideline violation, but the argument was that U$C committed a backcourt violation. While you are allowed to throw from the sideline into the backcourt for an inbound, I think the argument is that some/or part of the U$C player receiving the ball was in the front court when it was released by the inbounder, or when it was first touched by the receiving player. Have no idea what the rule is for inbounding. Does the player have to be completely behind the midcourt line when first touching a back-courted ball? Was he? It was a really close one.
It was just one free throw, I believe.glutton said:I'm pretty sure U$C got free throws after the T was called on the call bench.Civil Bear said:Yeah, if a T then why no free throws? Of course, Walton and Robinson couldn't be bothered to explain.bearsandgiants said:
Was on an assistant, either for arguing a non-call, or entering the court, or both. Apparently they had already been warned, so might have just been a sideline violation, but the argument was that U$C committed a backcourt violation. While you are allowed to throw from the sideline into the backcourt for an inbound, I think the argument is that some/or part of the U$C player receiving the ball was in the front court when it was released by the inbounder, or when it was first touched by the receiving player. Have no idea what the rule is for inbounding. Does the player have to be completely behind the midcourt line when first touching a back-courted ball? Was he? It was a really close one.
Ah, I missed it on the TV.75bear said:It was just one free throw, I believe.glutton said:I'm pretty sure U$C got free throws after the T was called on the call bench.Civil Bear said:Yeah, if a T then why no free throws? Of course, Walton and Robinson couldn't be bothered to explain.bearsandgiants said:
Was on an assistant, either for arguing a non-call, or entering the court, or both. Apparently they had already been warned, so might have just been a sideline violation, but the argument was that U$C committed a backcourt violation. While you are allowed to throw from the sideline into the backcourt for an inbound, I think the argument is that some/or part of the U$C player receiving the ball was in the front court when it was released by the inbounder, or when it was first touched by the receiving player. Have no idea what the rule is for inbounding. Does the player have to be completely behind the midcourt line when first touching a back-courted ball? Was he? It was a really close one.
I thought it was pretty obviously the correct call. This is from the NCAA Men's Basketball Case Book from last year:bearsandgiants said:
Was on an assistant, either for arguing a non-call, or entering the court, or both. Apparently they had already been warned, so might have just been a sideline violation, but the argument was that U$C committed a backcourt violation. While you are allowed to throw from the sideline into the backcourt for an inbound, I think the argument is that some/or part of the U$C player receiving the ball was in the front court when it was released by the inbounder, or when it was first touched by the receiving player. Have no idea what the rule is for inbounding. Does the player have to be completely behind the midcourt line when first touching a back-courted ball? Was he? It was a really close one.
Quote:
A.R. 252. The ball is at A1's disposal for a throw-in. A1 passes the ball to A2, who catches the ball while airborne in the front court. A2 lands with one foot in the front court followed with the other foot landing in the backcourt.
RULING: Legal play. A player shall be permitted to first secure control of the ball after a throw-in, while both feet are off the playing court in the front court, and land with one foot or both feet in the backcourt. (Rule 9-12.10 and 9-12.8)
Our coach should know the rule better, and have better control of himself to not get a technical foul, which cost us one point in a game that went to OT.
75bear said:It was just one free throw, I believe.glutton said:I'm pretty sure U$C got free throws after the T was called on the call bench.Civil Bear said:Yeah, if a T then why no free throws? Of course, Walton and Robinson couldn't be bothered to explain.bearsandgiants said:
Was on an assistant, either for arguing a non-call, or entering the court, or both. Apparently they had already been warned, so might have just been a sideline violation, but the argument was that U$C committed a backcourt violation. While you are allowed to throw from the sideline into the backcourt for an inbound, I think the argument is that some/or part of the U$C player receiving the ball was in the front court when it was released by the inbounder, or when it was first touched by the receiving player. Have no idea what the rule is for inbounding. Does the player have to be completely behind the midcourt line when first touching a back-courted ball? Was he? It was a really close one.
Yes. You're correct. It was one free throw.
Golden One said:75bear said:It was just one free throw, I believe.glutton said:I'm pretty sure U$C got free throws after the T was called on the call bench.Civil Bear said:Yeah, if a T then why no free throws? Of course, Walton and Robinson couldn't be bothered to explain.bearsandgiants said:
Was on an assistant, either for arguing a non-call, or entering the court, or both. Apparently they had already been warned, so might have just been a sideline violation, but the argument was that U$C committed a backcourt violation. While you are allowed to throw from the sideline into the backcourt for an inbound, I think the argument is that some/or part of the U$C player receiving the ball was in the front court when it was released by the inbounder, or when it was first touched by the receiving player. Have no idea what the rule is for inbounding. Does the player have to be completely behind the midcourt line when first touching a back-courted ball? Was he? It was a really close one.
Yes. You're correct. It was one free throw.
The stats for the game show 2 technicals.
Go Bears!
There was one free throw for the foul on the bench. The stats show 2 technicals because, in addition to the bench tech that is the subject of this thread, Brown's grab of Johnson from behind, resulting in 2 FT's and the ball, technically gets called a technical foul. Fortunately, Johnson missed both of those FT's.oskidunker said:Golden One said:75bear said:It was just one free throw, I believe.glutton said:I'm pretty sure U$C got free throws after the T was called on the call bench.Civil Bear said:Yeah, if a T then why no free throws? Of course, Walton and Robinson couldn't be bothered to explain.bearsandgiants said:
Was on an assistant, either for arguing a non-call, or entering the court, or both. Apparently they had already been warned, so might have just been a sideline violation, but the argument was that U$C committed a backcourt violation. While you are allowed to throw from the sideline into the backcourt for an inbound, I think the argument is that some/or part of the U$C player receiving the ball was in the front court when it was released by the inbounder, or when it was first touched by the receiving player. Have no idea what the rule is for inbounding. Does the player have to be completely behind the midcourt line when first touching a back-courted ball? Was he? It was a really close one.
Yes. You're correct. It was one free throw.
The stats for the game show 2 technicals.
Our PA announcer (the great Matt Foley), did announce that the call on the bench was a Class B Technical Foul on the Cal bench. Class B Technicals result in one free throw, which Boogie Ellis shot and made. The play-by-play shows the technical as "TEAM." Usually a ref calling a technical doesn't specify to the scorer's table the specific nature of the violation (e.g., doesn't say "called me an inappropriate name"), and we're left to guess.
Under Rule 10 Section 4 (Class B Technical Infractions) Article 2 (covering the head coach and bench personnel), "A technical foul shall be assessed to a coach and/or all bench personnel for the following infractions: . . . e. All bench personnel shall remain seated on the bench while the ball is live, except as follows: 1. The head coach may stand but must remain completely and clearly in the 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 scorers' table. 4. The head coach moving to the scorers' table 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 or to request a monitor review for a flagrant 2 contact technical foul or a Restricted Area play in the last two minutes of the second period or of any overtime period. (See Rules 2-12, 11-2.1.d.4, 11-2.1.e.2 and 5-11.5.) 5. To seek information from the official scorer or official timer during a timeout or an intermission."
I was watching the play and not the bench, so best guess, an assistant coach stood up in reaction to the inbounds pass that may have appeared on quick glance to some to be a backcourt violation (even if it wasn't), and got called for violation of Rule 10 Section 4 Article 2e, because he didn't remain seated on the bench while the ball was live and didn't fall under any of the exceptions under Article 2e. In article 2 don't see any other potential Class B violations that could possibly applied to what was going on.
The tech could NOT have been for arguing, that would be a Section 3 Class A Unsporting Technical Infraction which would result in two free throws, not one. You rarely see anyone called for a Class B for standing up, but technically, it is only allowed to "spontaneously react to an outstanding play," and since the failure to remain seated was due to a reaction to a non-call (whether the non-call was correct or not), and not an outstanding play, it does constitute a Class B Technical Infraction.
If an assistant said "Hey!" and points to the play white seated, no problem, neither a Class A nor a Class B. If he stands up and says, "Hey!" it technically is a Class B, one FT. And if he says "Get your F'in head out of your a$$" while seated, it is a Class A and 2 FT's. Whoever the tech was on isn't so much responsible due to a failure to know the backcourt rule as due to a failure to obey the rule to stay seated. Still, assistants need to stay in control and not get up when the ball is live, no matter what they think they see.
I'll note that Madsen frequently gets a warning under 10.4.2.e.1 for not being clearly and completely in the coaching box, but so far as I know, he hasn't I don't think he's gotten hit with a Class B yet this year.
Cal8285 said:There was one free throw for the foul on the bench. The stats show 2 technicals because, in addition to the bench tech that is the subject of this thread, Brown's grab of Johnson from behind, resulting in 2 FT's and the ball, technically gets called a technical foul. Fortunately, Johnson missed both of those FT's.oskidunker said:Golden One said:75bear said:It was just one free throw, I believe.glutton said:I'm pretty sure U$C got free throws after the T was called on the call bench.Civil Bear said:Yeah, if a T then why no free throws? Of course, Walton and Robinson couldn't be bothered to explain.bearsandgiants said:
Was on an assistant, either for arguing a non-call, or entering the court, or both. Apparently they had already been warned, so might have just been a sideline violation, but the argument was that U$C committed a backcourt violation. While you are allowed to throw from the sideline into the backcourt for an inbound, I think the argument is that some/or part of the U$C player receiving the ball was in the front court when it was released by the inbounder, or when it was first touched by the receiving player. Have no idea what the rule is for inbounding. Does the player have to be completely behind the midcourt line when first touching a back-courted ball? Was he? It was a really close one.
Yes. You're correct. It was one free throw.
The stats for the game show 2 technicals.
Our PA announcer (the great Matt Foley), did announce that the call on the bench was a Class B Technical Foul on the Cal bench. Class B Technicals result in one free throw, which Boogie Ellis shot and made. The play-by-play shows the technical as "TEAM." Usually a ref calling a technical doesn't specify to the scorer's table the specific nature of the violation (e.g., doesn't say "called me an inappropriate name"), and we're left to guess.
Under Rule 10 Section 4 (Class B Technical Infractions) Article 2 (covering the head coach and bench personnel), "A technical foul shall be assessed to a coach and/or all bench personnel for the following infractions: . . . e. All bench personnel shall remain seated on the bench while the ball is live, except as follows: 1. The head coach may stand but must remain completely and clearly in the 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 scorers' table. 4. The head coach moving to the scorers' table 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 or to request a monitor review for a flagrant 2 contact technical foul or a Restricted Area play in the last two minutes of the second period or of any overtime period. (See Rules 2-12, 11-2.1.d.4, 11-2.1.e.2 and 5-11.5.) 5. To seek information from the official scorer or official timer during a timeout or an intermission."
I was watching the play and not the bench, so best guess, an assistant coach stood up in reaction to the inbounds pass that may have appeared on quick glance to some to be a backcourt violation (even if it wasn't), and got called for violation of Rule 10 Section 4 Article 2e, because he didn't remain seated on the bench while the ball was live and didn't fall under any of the exceptions under Article 2e. In article 2 don't see any other potential Class B violations that could possibly applied to what was going on.
The tech could NOT have been for arguing, that would be a Section 3 Class A Unsporting Technical Infraction which would result in two free throws, not one. You rarely see anyone called for a Class B for standing up, but technically, it is only allowed to "spontaneously react to an outstanding play," and since the failure to remain seated was due to a reaction to a non-call (whether the non-call was correct or not), and not an outstanding play, it does constitute a Class B Technical Infraction.
If an assistant said "Hey!" and points to the play white seated, no problem, neither a Class A nor a Class B. If he stands up and says, "Hey!" it technically is a Class B, one FT. And if he says "Get your F'in head out of your a$$" while seated, it is a Class A and 2 FT's. Whoever the tech was on isn't so much responsible due to a failure to know the backcourt rule as due to a failure to obey the rule to stay seated. Still, assistants need to stay in control and not get up when the ball is live, no matter what they think they see.
I'll note that Madsen frequently gets a warning under 10.4.2.e.1 for not being clearly and completely in the coaching box, but so far as I know, he hasn't I don't think he's gotten hit with a Class B yet this year.
It was so loud I could not hear the announcer. Maybe just me but I really could not understand much that was said during the game. Usually I can
Go Bears!
Featured Stories
See All
The Rodcast: The Greatest Drive Ever?
by Rod Benson
Cal Hosts Stanford In 127th Big Game
by Cal Athletics
Cal Wins Thriller Over Auburn
by Cal Athletics
Depleted Bears Hold Off Air Force, 78-69
by Jim McGill