MBB: Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association

[Flying Dutch Fan]

Interesting discussion, but it leaves a question in my head.  If a coach is warned about being out of the box, why does that warning carry over to a player touching the ball after it goes through the basket?  Is it one warning to a team (for whatever reason) and then anything else that you could be warned for is covered as well? If that is the case, then I can see why a player might not know the "warning is in effect".

[ChicagoHopeNut]

If the refs followed the NCAA rules, he would get a warning and then get teed up for each subsequent violation.  And this is not one of those rules that is in the books but really not to be enforced.  The NCAA clearly takes this very seriously but I never see it enforced in the MIAA. I don't think any players or coaches ever "earn" the right to break any rules.

I've never seen this rule regularly enforced at any level of basketball, in any league. This is not a situation where MIAA refs depart from the norm.

Either way it's a rule that clearly calls for support from the officials. When a coach roams onto the floor, he blatently disrespects the rules (and officials).

I've only seen the call regularly made when the coach wanders onto the court and gets bumped by a player. I don't think any warning is administered when a coach contacts a player or the ball during play.

You're correct. A few years back GVW made contact with Andy Draayer as he was preparing to successfully launch a three. The ref awarded Calvin the basket plus two free throws.

I did not see or here Saturday's game so I am still a little unclear of what happened.

However, in general my view (applied at any level, not just as it relates to the MIAA) is if a coach interferes with the play in any way by being outside of the coaches box the officials should call a technical or whatever is appropriate (i.e. Draayer example). But if the coaches wander up the court a bit much, which almost every coach does at least once in awhile, I think just getting the coach back in the box is appropriate particularly in cases where a coach is yelling/coaching his team and not berating the officials. 

In my view, officials have a big enough of an impact on games (good or bad but let's be honest, in the MIAA it's usually bad) that calling technicals on coaching box violations is typically too much.

[ziggy]

Interesting discussion, but it leaves a question in my head.  If a coach is warned about being out of the box, why does that warning carry over to a player touching the ball after it goes through the basket?  Is it one warning to a team (for whatever reason) and then anything else that you could be warned for is covered as well? If that is the case, then I can see why a player might not know the "warning is in effect".

My guess is that the wandering coach scenario is considered delay of game, for which a team receives one warning prior to subsequent offenses resulting in technical fouls.

Under that assumption the player touching the ball after a basket has committed an infraction under the same category, albeit a different act.

[Happy Calvin Guy]

In my view, officials have a big enough of an impact on games (good or bad but let's be honest, in the MIAA it's usually bad) that calling technicals on coaching box violations is typically too much.

That may be your view, but apparantly not one the NCAA shares.  

And, I would think that one or two techs would be enough to re-train even the old guard coaches pretty quick.  Then the refs wouldn't have to deal with it anymore and it would then be a non-factor once we all learned to respect the rules.

In my opinion, the refereeing in the MIAA has improved over last year.  Nothing specific, just a feeling from having watched a bunch of games both seasons.  I think all any of want is more consistency in how things are called and the application of the rulebook on all matters.

[KnightSlappy]

In my opinion, the refereeing in the MIAA has improved over last year.  Nothing specific, just a feeling from having watched a bunch of games both seasons.  I think all any of want is more consistency in how things are called and the application of the rulebook on all matters.

Maybe the in-game consistency has gotten better, but it would be nice to see game-to-game consistency as to what is called or not. Maybe it's impossible at any level, but it would be nice...

[almcguirejr]

You're correct. A few years back GVW made contact with Andy Draayer as he was preparing to successfully launch a three. The ref awarded Calvin the basket plus two free throws.

How would the officials have handled GVW's foul  if Draayer had missed?

[Erm Schmigget]

Congratulations to Peter Bunn of Hope, who has been named MIAA player of the week.  His 31 points at Olivet on Saturday is a college career high....but not an overall career high.  In another game in Olivet, while he was playing for Lansing Christian HS, Peter scored 36pts.     As suggested in the Holland Sentinel Sunday, they must not like him much in Olivet.

[Erm Schmigget]

You're correct. A few years back GVW made contact with Andy Draayer as he was preparing to successfully launch a three. The ref awarded Calvin the basket plus two free throws.

How would the officials have handled GVW's foul  if Draayer had missed?

I would imagine Calvin would be awarded 2 shots and the ball.  How else might it be handled?

[almcguirejr]

You're correct. A few years back GVW made contact with Andy Draayer as he was preparing to successfully launch a three. The ref awarded Calvin the basket plus two free throws.

How would the officials have handled GVW's foul  if Draayer had missed?

I would imagine Calvin would be awarded 2 shots and the ball.  How else might it be handled?

He shot  a 3. It seems to me he should get 3 foul shots plus the technical and the ball. Do you reward a coach for interfering with play? 

[Happy Calvin Guy]

Congratulations to Peter Bunn of Hope, who has been named MIAA player of the week.  His 31 points at Olivet on Saturday is a college career high....but not an overall career high.  In another game in Olivet, while he was playing for Lansing Christian HS, Peter scored 36pts.     As suggested in the Holland Sentinel Sunday, they must not like him much in Olivet.

At what point does Bunn enter the MVP discussion?  On this forum it seems we've focused on McClary vs Mantel, but Bunn should probably take Mantel's spot in this debate.  He is clearly the go-to guy for Hope (much like Reimink last year), has helped Hope play into a first-place tie, in conference games he leads the league in 3 -pt % and steals and shoots 92% from the line.  I've always felt that he is a complete player on both ends of the floor.  For anyone who feels that the MVP should come from a team at the top of the standings, Bunn's becoming that vote.

[Erm Schmigget]

If the refs followed the NCAA rules, he would get a warning and then get teed up for each subsequent violation.  And this is not one of those rules that is in the books but really not to be enforced.  The NCAA clearly takes this very seriously but I never see it enforced in the MIAA. I don't think any players or coaches ever "earn" the right to break any rules.

I've never seen this rule regularly enforced at any level of basketball, in any league. This is not a situation where MIAA refs depart from the norm.

Either way it's a rule that clearly calls for support from the officials. When a coach roams onto the floor, he blatently disrespects the rules (and officials).

I've only seen the call regularly made when the coach wanders onto the court and gets bumped by a player. I don't think any warning is administered when a coach contacts a player or the ball during play.

You're correct. A few years back GVW made contact with Andy Draayer as he was preparing to successfully launch a three. The ref awarded Calvin the basket plus two free throws.

Maybe one thing to differentiate here is the delay of game issue and the touching a player on the court rule.  If I remember correctly, in the case of GVW touching Draayer while he was shooting, GVW was safely in the coaching box, giving instructions to his players.  He just absent-mindedly put up a hand as Draayer positioned himself right in front of him.  GVW instantly accepted responsibility for his error, and had one of those "I can't believe I just did that" looks on his face.  No malicious intent on the coach's part, just a silly mistake that the refs rightly called.

[Erm Schmigget]

You're correct. A few years back GVW made contact with Andy Draayer as he was preparing to successfully launch a three. The ref awarded Calvin the basket plus two free throws.

How would the officials have handled GVW's foul  if Draayer had missed?

I would imagine Calvin would be awarded 2 shots and the ball.  How else might it be handled?

He shot  a 3. It seems to me he should get 3 foul shots plus the technical and the ball. Do you reward a coach for interfering with play? 

Maybe this question needs to be answered first: did GVW touch the player on the court before or after he released the ball?

[Happy Calvin Guy]

 If I remember correctly, in the case of GVW touching Draayer while he was shooting, GVW was safely in the coaching box, giving instructions to his players.  He just absent-mindedly put up a hand as Draayer positioned himself right in front of him.  GVW instantly accepted responsibility for his error, and had one of those "I can't believe I just did that" looks on his face.  No malicious intent on the coach's part, just a silly mistake that the refs rightly called.

By definition, the coaching box is entirely out of bounds.  At its closest point, the 3 point line is 63 inches from the sideline (in the corners, using the old men's three point line when this happened).  So, either Draayer was bombing away from beyond NBA depth, or GVW was well onto the court.  I'm sure it wasn't intentional or malicious, but when you repeatedly put yourself in a position (i.e. on the court during play) for bad things to happen, eventually they do.  This is why the NCAA rulebook is serious on this matter.

[Knightmare]

You're correct. A few years back GVW made contact with Andy Draayer as he was preparing to successfully launch a three. The ref awarded Calvin the basket plus two free throws.

How would the officials have handled GVW's foul  if Draayer had missed?

I would imagine Calvin would be awarded 2 shots and the ball.  How else might it be handled?

I would think that they could award the basket (whether it is made or not) in much the same way that goal-tending can be called as well as a foul and free throws awarded on a shot.  Even if the coach inadvertently touches the player that is still interference and can be assumed to be the reason that the shot was missed.  Now I don't know if this is how the rule works but I think it would make sense and be more of a deterrent if a player was awarded the 3pts. for attempted 3-pt. shot that was interfered and also given the technical.

On this note, has there ever been a smart crafty player that has "initiated" the inadvertent contact with a coach on the floor to draw a call?

[Erm Schmigget]

HCG:  Draayer repeatedly bombed away from NBA depth.

standout:  Is interference the call when a defender hacks a shooter, thus "interfering" with the shot, thus awarding the basket to the shooter?