Uniform Penalty Quiz

[Woodenstick]

1. What do you do when both teams (NFHS) have technical uniform violations that are observed by the referee and determined to be a violation before the game starts? Blue team has 2 uniform violations, and red team has one. The red coach complains and the referee determines to penalize Blue and signals that it is red ball. Before starting play, the referee then notices a red player with a violation.

A. Award ball by alternate possession.

B. Red Team (with the fewest violations) gets the ball.

C. Opponent of last team penalized (blue team) gets the ball.

D. Face off.

E. Leave it as red ball.

F. Tell the coaches you don't care, we are here to play lacrosse not be fashion critics.

G. Other.

H. This is a stupid quiz, this could never happen.

[LaxRef]

I'll hold off on answering, but I think the correct call and the one that makes sense are different here. :monkey:

[eme]

LaxRef is just salivating to have a faceoff here.....

[TXD2LAX]

1. What do you do when both teams (NFHS) have technical uniform violations that are observed by the referee and determined to be a violation before the game starts? Blue team has 2 uniform violations, and red team has one. The red coach complains and the referee determines to penalize Blue and signals that it is red ball. Before starting play, the referee then notices a red player with a violation.

A. Award ball by alternate possession.

B. Red Team (with the fewest violations) gets the ball.

C. Opponent of last team penalized (blue team) gets the ball.

D. Face off.

E. Leave it as red ball.

F. Tell the coaches you don't care, we are here to play lacrosse not be fashion critics.

G. Other.

H. This is a stupid quiz, this could never happen.

My gut tells me to go with F, because I think it is ignorant. I am leaning towards G first by determining if all the problems can be fixed before the start of the game. If the answer to that is no, I would go with C. My thinking is it would be like a stick check request by coach A prior to the start of the game, if the B player was found to have an illegal stick and then coach B immediately called for a stick check and the A player was found with an illegal stick, then B would end up with the ball. In the fashion scenario, only one violation per team can be called, so that rules out the multiple Blue team violations. It just means their momma dresses them funny.

[Duncan26]

I am pretty sure the rules state AP but face off seems more appropriate.

[LaxRef]

No one else seems to be answering, so here we go:

I don't see how you can enforce these fouls sequentially based on when you noticed them since there is actually no foul until you're ready to start the game. After all, how do you know the Blue guys with violations aren't going to fix them before game time? Thus, I think you have to treat these as just two simultaneous technical fouls, one per team, just prior to the opening face-off.

By NFHS rules, the ball is awarded by AP.

By common sense (and NCAA rules, which don't apply here at all), you'd want to have a face-off.

I wish the NFHS would fix this one. It comes up far more often when doing stick checks between periods or after a goal: both sticks are illegal, same penalty time, rules say award possession by AP.

[eme]

LaxRef is correct.
Just to play the Devil's Advocate. Throughout the NFHS book, loose ball, simultaneous technical fouls or loose-ball simultaneous personal fouls where penalty time is the same= award by AP. In our never-ending quest for consistency, why have the procedure differ just because a FO is looming? I know it "feels better" but this difference makes just one more inconsistency officials have to remember.

The important things to remember in this excellent quiz are that numerous uniform violations on a single team= a single violation. And violations by both teams are treated as simultaneous even though your eagle eye "spotted"
the Team Blue A1 in red shorts when everyone else on Team B has blue shorts just a few moments before you "spotted" Team Red A1 in blue shorts when all his teammates are in red shorts.

[best of mml]

umm, what is the"NFHS"? anyone know. because i looked it up and got some New York stock prices....

[LaxRef]

umm, what is the"NFHS"? anyone know. because i looked it up and got some New York stock prices....

There's a reason we have an acronym dictionary and an FAQ. :read: :chuckle:

[TXD2LAX]

The important things to remember in this excellent quiz are that numerous uniform violations on a single team= a single violation. And violations by both teams are treated as simultaneous even though your eagle eye "spotted"
the Team Blue A1 in red shorts when everyone else on Team B has blue shorts just a few moments before you "spotted" Team Red A1 in blue shorts when all his teammates are in red shorts.

Just have them swap shorts so it doesn't happen again next week.:banghead:

[3rdPersonPlural]

.....there is actually no foul until you're ready to start the game.


So you really can't call the foul(s) until the starters come out for the face off. OK.

What if the fashion faux pas is on the bench for the opening face off? Sure, we can call it anyway, but the coach might protest that that kid is injured and won't play, or the kid's mom is hustling back from the dry cleaners with the correct item of clothing, and he'll stay off the field until she arrives. Or something.

I understand the need to have uniform expectations and therefore an enforcement mechanism must be in place, and therefore we need to enforce that rule, but uniform violations are usually the fault of some overworked mom or underfunded team budget or late addition to a team. I feel icky penalizing a team for such issues, and tend to be apologetic when compelled to call 'em.

Thank goodness it's just a possession award.

[eme]

"Coach, I assume that player with the illegal uniform on the bench will not be playing. If he is planning to play with that uniform, we will award the ball to the other team."

Now, if he mysteriously appears later in the game with the improper uniform, go straight to USC.

[Woodenstick]

All really good posts, you smoked my sequential dead ball issue and one penalty for all violations issue, and then added issues I had not thought of. I also think AP is the "correct" answer, although not really a very elegant one. And I did think that was the answer even before LR chimed in....

[pboyd]

I'm not buying the "simultaneous fouls - no possession - award according to alternate possession" - when we all know that we should be facing off for the pre-game uniform violations on both teams and even the equipment violations on both teams with equal time and no Play On, Flag Down, or Extra-Man situation at the end of a quarter.
I would suggest that in these situations we don't need to even consider possession/no possession trying to fit these two situations into the various simultaneous foul conditions for awarding the ball. Let's recognize that NFHS Rule 7-6-4.b.3 "If simultaneous technical fouls occur prior to the start of a period - resume play according to Rule 4-3" is missing.
Would you consider the Pre-Game situation or the situation during equipment checks between quarters that the ball is loose? Rule 4-5-4 indicates that "A ball not in possession of a player is a loose ball" - so if we are indicating "no possession" then the ball must be loose - which is not the situation we are talking about. I would suggest that these two NFHS situations could be covered by NFHS Rule 7-7 Fouls After End Of Period where the rule indicates that before or after the start of a period - assess the penalty and play shall be resumed as provide in Rule 4-3 -> Faceoff since none of the 4-3 Exceptions apply.

[eme]

1. Yes, I consider that pre-game situation and that situation during a between-quarters equipment check to be loose ball situations. If it isn't loose, which team, then, has possession?
2. There is no 7-6-4-b-3. It is not missing; it doesn't exist.But there is 7-6-4-b-2 which explicitly states what to do. This latter rule covers the situation and there is nothing in 4-3 that negates what 7-6-4-b-2 tells you to do.

[LaxRef]

1. Yes, I consider that pre-game situation and that situation during a between-quarters equipment check to be loose ball situations. If it isn't loose, which team, then, has possession?
2. There is no 7-6-4-b-3. It is not missing; it doesn't exist.But there is 7-6-4-b-2 which explicitly states what to do. This latter rule covers the situation and there is nothing in 4-3 that negates what 7-6-4-b-2 tells you to do.

Seconded. While I wholeheartedly agree that the thing that makes the most sense in this situation is to have a face-off, I can't abide by using that to reverse-engineer an explanation of how the rules actually support that decision. If they did, the NCAA wouldn't have changed their rules to cover the situation of simul. fouls with a face-off pending.

[wolfenburg]

i just was thinking what this is under ILF rules:

sim. technical fouls, so they chanceled out each other and the game will start with possesion of the team that was in possesion (none) so there will be a face off under the same conditions as it would be if there where no foul (so a "normal face off).

Since so now I know what to do in such a case, because we very often have players without proper Uniform, but at least every team has someone with a wrong underguarment or whatever (here in germaeny) so if they whant it the hard way they get it :-)

[LaxRef]

i just was thinking what this is under ILF rules:

sim. technical fouls, so they chanceled out each other and the game will start with possesion of the team that was in possesion (none) so there will be a face off under the same conditions as it would be if there where no foul (so a "normal face off).

Since so now I know what to do in such a case, because we very often have players without proper Uniform, but at least every team has someone with a wrong underguarment or whatever (here in germaeny) so if they whant it the hard way they get it :-)

I doubt the ILF rule is the same on this as the brand-new NFHS rule.

[BlueJaysLaxFan]

What does not make any sense about this rule is that though both teams have committed a uniform violation prior to the FO, the rules tell us to penalize only the one team based on AP. Of course we do not even know who has AP until the coin toss which occurs after certification. So when we ask the coaches about their respective illegally uniformed / equipped players during certification and we are told they are playing, we must then inform them that each team will be assessed a technical and possession at the start of the game will be determined after the coin toss. This then means that if a captain wins the toss, he will most likely ask for first AP. Interesting scenario.

[LaxRef]

What does not make any sense about this rule is that though both teams have committed a uniform violation prior to the FO, the rules tell us to penalize only the one team based on AP. Of course we do not even know who has AP until the coin toss which occurs after certification. So when we ask the coaches about their respective illegally uniformed / equipped players during certification and we are told they are playing, we must then inform them that each team will be assessed a technical and possession at the start of the game will be determined after the coin toss. This then means that if a captain wins the toss, he will most likely ask for first AP. Interesting scenario.

Of course, no one says we have to tell the other team we're in a simul. foul situation. We could just let both teams think that they're the ones going to be penalized.

The team choosing AP could also get faked out: Teams A and B both have illegal uniforms and are told about the situation. Team A wins the toss and chooses AP. Team B then throws away the illegal jersey, puts a legal one on the player, and comes out legal for the lineup. Then the Team A goalie gets the sun in his eyes in the fourth quarter!

[TXD2LAX]

Of course, no one says we have to tell the other team we're in a simul. foul situation. We could just let both teams think that they're the ones going to be penalized.

The team choosing AP could also get faked out: Teams A and B both have illegal uniforms and are told about the situation. Team A wins the toss and chooses AP. Team B then throws away the illegal jersey, puts a legal one on the player, and comes out legal for the lineup. Then the Team A goalie gets the sun in his eyes in the fourth quarter!

Now you are getting way out there. If team B had a legal uniform for the kid all along why would he have the illegal one on? If it were a jersey top, wouldnt the number on the jersey vary from what was turned in on the scoresheet? The situation you describe would be like taking your worst player and putting him as a starting attackman for the opening faceoff, just so you could name him as your "in-home" player. I think you may be making the coaches out to be a bit more cleaver than they actually are.

[LaxRef]

Now you are getting way out there. If team B had a legal uniform for the kid all along why would he have the illegal one on? If it were a jersey top, wouldnt the number on the jersey vary from what was turned in on the scoresheet? The situation you describe would be like taking your worst player and putting him as a starting attackman for the opening faceoff, just so you could name him as your "in-home" player. I think you may be making the coaches out to be a bit more cleaver than they actually are.

I'm just trying to out-think your scenario: the kid had the illegal jersey on for the express purpose of getting the other team to choose AP thinking that that would get them possession, then they pull the double cross! (Yes, it's out there, but it would be a logical response if teams started choosing AP thinking they were going to get the opening possession out of it; maybe the NFHS will fix this rule, which is the true source of all of this lunacy.)

As to your second scenario, I know a coach who starts his worst attackman just so he can be the in-home; he makes the kid sub out ASAP.

[TXD2LAX]

As to your second scenario, I know a coach who starts his worst attackman just so he can be the in-home; he makes the kid sub out ASAP.

So much for "Honor the Game"

[PlayOn]

Since the violations occurred before play starts,and they are technical fouls i'm going with Face off.

[eme]

You would probably get away with it since few coaches know the rules that well. And it certainly feels "fair." But it is not what the rulebook states.

[PlayOn]

so what did we conclude as the appropriate procedure for this situation?

Based on other discussion though you would have to execute this penalty within the 20 second period of time it takes from the time the teams are whistled to take the field and the faceoff. That way you would have given them ample time to be properly equipped and not have any weird situations during the coin toss.

I should also add that short of socks with skull and crossbones which are exclusively pointed out in the rule book I am not going to start penalizing underfunded teams for numbers that are the wrong size on the front of the jersey etc. Maybe if there is an issue with helmet color or something along those lines or if students have decals they added on their own I may say something to the coach or instruct the student to remove any non-school related symbols but I have more important things to worry about than penalizing a school at the beginning of every matchup because they couldn't afford to print new jerseys.

Here's another question though, is a religious symbol that someone chooses to add to their helmet illegal? What if a kid was a pagan and put a pentagram on their helmet? I am not going tell a kid to remove a cross he stuck on there because i just don't feel like dealing with that nonsense.

[LaxRef]

so what did we conclude as the appropriate procedure for this situation?

Correct = AP
Appropriate = Face-off.

Follow your heart, I guess.

Based on other discussion though you would have to execute this penalty within the 20 second period of time it takes from the time the teams are whistled to take the field and the faceoff. That way you would have given them ample time to be properly equipped and not have any weird situations during the coin toss.

I should also add that short of socks with skull and crossbones which are exclusively pointed out in the rule book I am not going to start penalizing underfunded teams for numbers that are the wrong size on the front of the jersey etc. Maybe if there is an issue with helmet color or something along those lines or if students have decals they added on their own I may say something to the coach or instruct the student to remove any non-school related symbols but I have more important things to worry about than penalizing a school at the beginning of every matchup because they couldn't afford to print new jerseys.?

Two thoughts:

I'm not making a big deal out of Jersey number size unless the opposing coach makes it an issue before the game. If he calls attention to it after the game, it's too late.

The penalty is so minor that I'd have no problem assessing it if appropriate.

Here's another question though, is a religious symbol that someone chooses to add to their helmet illegal? What if a kid was a pagan and put a pentagram on their helmet? I am not going tell a kid to remove a cross he stuck on there because i just don't feel like dealing with that nonsense.

If it is not school-issued, it's illegal, period. I don't think there are any schools out there issuing pagan stickers to their sports teams.