You are amazing sir! I have been a fan and a player of this amazing gsme since I was 3 years old im only in year 2 of my career as an official and I dont think Im turning back... I love these videos and I watch them every night.
Play #2 (Sideline block foul, dead ball tech): Am I the only one that thinks the defender had LGP and moving obliquely? The dribbler tried to force himself into a space that was not there. My call: OB to white (officiate the defender, honor legal defense). And then the dead ball tech.
I agree and thought the exact same thing the first time I viewed it (and never changed my mind). (Ballhandler did not get head and shoulders around the defender.)
I think I would have a flagrant T and gone on Play 2 as well. That's usually a precursor to a fight like that and throwing the ball at someone in that context should be an ejection T to prevent escalation either then or later on.
Play 1 is a flagrant technical and ejection IMO for the kick that connected; Play 2 I think we have nothing since the player was just trying to throw the ball off the opponent while falling out of bounds; 3rd play looks like a hard foul while going for the block, so I just have a common foul; Play 4 is tough since the trail official only saw the end of the push and the kid actually flopped. The C needed to see that. Should have been technical foul on both kids or nothing but a talking to IMO; Play 5 has a lot going on and I think Greg explained it well with the fighting ejections and ejections for players leaving the bench. All 3 officials were still talking when the players came back on the court at the end and were congregating with no one watching them, which is an issue after a fight. They should have remained at the benches until the officials made a decision on what they going to do. Thanks for these plays!
Play 1: I have a flagrant technical foul with ejection. Play 3: I would be leaning toward intentional foul due to the excessive contact. I would have a discussion about foul elevation.
I would as well on P3 -- I think it's clear the team is beaten on defense and the contact is unnecessary. So an intentional foul there should be assessed.
Up here {Canada} I would call #1 an unsportsmanlike foul, in #2, without sound, I'd like to know if the whistle sounded well before the throw of the ball or not, which would affect the call. #3, common foul. but without the lead's view, hard to be definitive, #4, foul on the drive, double technical on the push and flop, #5, intentional on white, unsportsmanlike on dark.
It looks like 15 White fouls the shooter with contact to the face, which could certainly be ruled intentional. This action caused the ensuing flagrant action.
Player A1 gets fouled By player B1 while attempting a shot. Player A1 and Player B2 get into a shouting match with each other. They both ignore the whistle for a brief moment, and the official issues a double technical foul on both players, and puts both players on the bench. Who shoots the free throws (and which coach picks the players to shoot). After the free throws, how is the ball awarded.
The variable is 'puts both players on the bench.' Using NFHS rules, were they Technicals Flagrant resulting in disqualification? Or, were the players given an informal 'time out' in a rec setting? If using NFHS and the player was disqualified, their substitute would attempt any merited free-throws.
@@BetterOfficials let say they were both ejected. Who picks the replacement shooter, the coach or opposition coach. Is there ever a time when an opposition coach picks the shooter from the court? I thought there was a case for it, but can't find it anywhere.
Greg, in the fight video, for the 2 players that left the bench for black, why did you say there would only be 2 free throws? Wouldn't it be 4, 2 for each player ejected?
Good question. When team members leave the bench when a fight may break out, they each receive a flagrant technical foul but the penalty no matter how many leave the bench is a maximum of two free throws.
Play 5: White coaches and all but one player seem to be good sports. Coach kept bench players at the bench, and seemingly all but one of the white players on the floor were disinterested, including one who was just shooting layups. LOL. The foul shots were definitely not done properly. White should have had 4 more. The rules may be contradictory here. Rule 10.2 states that *players who enter the court without permission* are to be assessed a technical and *two* free throws, but Art 5 says that *players who leave the confines of the bench (nothing about entering the court) during a fight* are assessed one. These two players left the bench during a fight AND entered the court. I think that the "shall not leave the confines of the bench" actually means that they must remain seated because Art 4 states that players "must remain seated," and fights are not an exception to that rule (except for coaches). The rule also states that free throws are not awarded for SIMULTANEOUS technicals, not for one FOLLOWED by another.
Thank you Greg and your GO tech team for helping Officials to officiate this beautiful game...
Awesome! Thanks Darwin. GO BLUE!
You are amazing sir! I have been a fan and a player of this amazing gsme since I was 3 years old im only in year 2 of my career as an official and I dont think Im turning back... I love these videos and I watch them every night.
Wow, thanks!
Play #2 (Sideline block foul, dead ball tech): Am I the only one that thinks the defender had LGP and moving obliquely? The dribbler tried to force himself into a space that was not there. My call: OB to white (officiate the defender, honor legal defense). And then the dead ball tech.
I agree and thought the exact same thing the first time I viewed it (and never changed my mind). (Ballhandler did not get head and shoulders around the defender.)
I think I would have a flagrant T and gone on Play 2 as well. That's usually a precursor to a fight like that and throwing the ball at someone in that context should be an ejection T to prevent escalation either then or later on.
In play #2 I see they have a 3 point line, a 4 point line, a 5 point line and 6 point line on this court...holy moly!
did you get the video I sent with the coach bump?
Yes. Thanks.
Play 1 is a flagrant technical and ejection IMO for the kick that connected; Play 2 I think we have nothing since the player was just trying to throw the ball off the opponent while falling out of bounds; 3rd play looks like a hard foul while going for the block, so I just have a common foul; Play 4 is tough since the trail official only saw the end of the push and the kid actually flopped. The C needed to see that. Should have been technical foul on both kids or nothing but a talking to IMO; Play 5 has a lot going on and I think Greg explained it well with the fighting ejections and ejections for players leaving the bench. All 3 officials were still talking when the players came back on the court at the end and were congregating with no one watching them, which is an issue after a fight. They should have remained at the benches until the officials made a decision on what they going to do. Thanks for these plays!
Play 1: I have a flagrant technical foul with ejection. Play 3: I would be leaning toward intentional foul due to the excessive contact. I would have a discussion about foul elevation.
I would as well on P3 -- I think it's clear the team is beaten on defense and the contact is unnecessary. So an intentional foul there should be assessed.
Up here {Canada} I would call #1 an unsportsmanlike foul, in #2, without sound, I'd like to know if the whistle sounded well before the throw of the ball or not, which would affect the call. #3, common foul. but without the lead's view, hard to be definitive, #4, foul on the drive, double technical on the push and flop, #5, intentional on white, unsportsmanlike on dark.
Play 3: Wow! Head first into the "pillar of pain". You gotta be tough, athletic, AND hard headed to play in that arena.
Pillar of pain!
Flagrant technical
Play 1: Flagrant. Ejection.
It looks like 15 White fouls the shooter with contact to the face, which could certainly be ruled intentional. This action caused the ensuing flagrant action.
is it ok or a good idea to ask your partner, "hey can you watch the players real quick while I report", or something like that?
It is an unverbalized understanding.
Player A1 gets fouled By player B1 while attempting a shot. Player A1 and Player B2 get into a shouting match with each other. They both ignore the whistle for a brief moment, and the official issues a double technical foul on both players, and puts both players on the bench. Who shoots the free throws (and which coach picks the players to shoot). After the free throws, how is the ball awarded.
The variable is 'puts both players on the bench.' Using NFHS rules, were they Technicals Flagrant resulting in disqualification? Or, were the players given an informal 'time out' in a rec setting? If using NFHS and the player was disqualified, their substitute would attempt any merited free-throws.
@@BetterOfficials let say they were both ejected. Who picks the replacement shooter, the coach or opposition coach. Is there ever a time when an opposition coach picks the shooter from the court? I thought there was a case for it, but can't find it anywhere.
NFHS there is NEVER a time when the opposing coach chooses.
Greg, in the fight video, for the 2 players that left the bench for black, why did you say there would only be 2 free throws? Wouldn't it be 4, 2 for each player ejected?
Good question. When team members leave the bench when a fight may break out, they each receive a flagrant technical foul but the penalty no matter how many leave the bench is a maximum of two free throws.
Play 5: White coaches and all but one player seem to be good sports. Coach kept bench players at the bench, and seemingly all but one of the white players on the floor were disinterested, including one who was just shooting layups. LOL. The foul shots were definitely not done properly. White should have had 4 more. The rules may be contradictory here. Rule 10.2 states that *players who enter the court without permission* are to be assessed a technical and *two* free throws, but Art 5 says that *players who leave the confines of the bench (nothing about entering the court) during a fight* are assessed one. These two players left the bench during a fight AND entered the court. I think that the "shall not leave the confines of the bench" actually means that they must remain seated because Art 4 states that players "must remain seated," and fights are not an exception to that rule (except for coaches). The rule also states that free throws are not awarded for SIMULTANEOUS technicals, not for one FOLLOWED by another.