Who is in the Penalty Box?

[eme]

B1 gets a one-minute penalty for a slash. Play ends. Coach B now gets a conduct foul. He then gets a 1-min NR UnSp penalty. And then another one.

Who,exactly, is in the penalty box (I know, it's a hockey term...but easier to say than special substitition area) and for how long?

Hint: Fed. and ncaa rules will differ here.

[shrekjr]

Here's my NCAA guess......

B1 is in the box along with the "in-home" who is serving the coach's conduct penalties.

[SawyerLaxGirl44]

::offtopic::

ShrekJr... I think thats HILARIOUS!They call my bro Shrek...

(sorry, had to be said!)

[Mavido]

I was wrong..

[rilax]

NCAA

B1 1 min
B in-home (or second home if B1 is in home) 2 mins locked in then 30 more secs releasable (unless multi mins penalties are assessed)

NFHS
B1 1 min
B in-home (or second home if B1 is in home) 4 mins locked in then 30 more secs releasable and say good bye the coach cause ”because of his(her) actions the coach has ejected him(her) self from the game” (got that line from an NFL game last season) [NFHS 2nd USC if 3 locked and auto bye bye]

edit: ...can't type tonight

[eme]

Here is what I have, but the Fed. rulebook is somewhat murky as you shall see:

NCAA:
B1 in for one minute releasable

B2 in home (or second attack player if B1 was in home) in for one minute NR.

B3 (additional attack player) in for one minute NR

B4 (additional attack player) serves 30 seconds releasable for the coach's conduct foul. Stacking procedure kicks in...he waits outside the penalty box until one of the above penalties is released...then he enters to serve the 30 seconds. Remember that the 30 seconds is served last...after the NR penalties. IN NCAA play you can only have 3 men in the box or no fewer than seven on the field.

In short the coach had 3 penalties...and according to NCAA rule 5-10 Note 1: "If a coach continues to be abusive after the penalty is assessed, the official may assess addditional penalty time that shall be served by an additional attack player."

NFHS or Federation rules do not have that specific language 5-10 Note.1 (NCAA rules). What they have is Rule 7-4: "If multiple fouls of this type occur the referee shall assess the penalty time against an additional attack player..." And remember there is no stacking provision in Federation play...so they all pile into the box. Here goes:

B1 in for a minute

B2 (or second attack if B1 was in home) in for 30 seconds coach's conduct.
B3 in for one minute NR for coach's first unsportsmanlike
B4 in for 3 min. NR for second coach's unsportsmanlike which results in ejection.(rule 5-11 expulsion). Since all these penalties are on the same team (not simultaneous fouls that, by definition, involve both teams)...B1 and B2 can be released if a goal is scored.
So there are four B players in the box.

[CoachRob]

B1 serves 1-minute, releasable.

In-home (B2) serves a 30-second conduct foul (this is because team A had the ball as a result of B1's slash, thus team A was the last team offended and must either have the ball or be entitled to it, so the coach's CF occurred "with possession", which mandates a 30-second penalty).

Then, the first USC adds a 1 minute NR to the in-home (B2).

Then, the SECOND USC adds a 3-minute NR to the in-home, and the coach is ejected for two USC's. (Ejection for a 2nd USC mandates a 3-minute NR penalty.)

However, remember that the in-home must serve the NR's FIRST, followed by the releasable conduct foul (NFHS 7-2.5).

So........
B1: 1 minute, releasable
In-home (B2): Four minutes NR, followed by 30 seconds releasable.

But here's the kicker: If A1 commits a TECHNICAL foul before the restart of play but AFTER the coach's misbehavior, then the ball would be awarded to team B to restart play for a non-possession technical foul. A1 would NOT serve any time.

If A1 commits a PERSONAL foul before the restart of play but AFTER the coach's misbehavior (bad guy), then the ball would be awarded to team B to restart play AND A1 would be sent to the box for 1-minute. According to 7-2.4, all THREE players would now be locked in for the lesser amount of penalty time to be served by any player sent off from the time of the first dropped flag until the whistle blows to restart play (a spin-off of the simultanous foul rule).

So, A1 and B1 would be locked in for one-minute each (even though their penalties by themselves were releasable, they now become NR's). Since the in-home is already locked in for four minutes, A1's penalty would have no effect on his penalty time.

The reason B1's 1-minute is releasable unless team A commits a time-serving penalty is that players from BOTH teams must commit time-serving penalties for the releasable to non-releasable conversion provision to kick in.

That is a bit trickier, but is certainly worth knowing.

[shrekjr]

It is too early in the morning for me to think about Rob's "twist", I'll work on that one later. But the way he described the in-home serving all the penalty time is probably the way I would have enforced it, as opposed to eme's having a different player serve each of the conduct penalties.

Which is right???

[CoachRob]

I think eme is correct. The 30-second conduct fouls is served by the in-home (B2). An additional penalty would be served by the player listed below the in-home. In this case, the first 1-minute USC would be served by B3 (B3 in this case is the first attacker listed below the inhome on the line-up card); any further penalties get assessed against B4, then B5, etc.

I think that is the intent of the 3rd (and final) paragraph of NFHS 7-4.

Shrek,
What I am saying is that if BOTH teams commit time-serving penalties between the time the first flag is dropped during live play (for the slash in this case), and the whistle blows to start play again, are considered together for purposes of determining when they can be released from the "box". As such, the LEAST amount of time assessed in any single penalty is considered NR for all players who were sent off during this time period.

So, in my twist case:

B1 slashes (flag down) and gets sent off for 1-minute releasable
B2 serves the in-home releasable 30-second conduct foul for his coach
B3 serves the 1-minute NR USC penalty for his coach
B4 serves the 3-minute NR USC penalty for his coach (ejection)
A1 now gets sent off for what is NORMALLY a releasable 1-minute personal foul (non-vicious illegal body check for example).

Now, since BOTH teams have players sent off, the least amount of time is considered NR for all sent to the "box" during this time frame (any players from either team already in the "box" are excluded from the discussion below).

In this case, B1 (slash), B3 (USC), and A1 (body check) have all been assessed 1-minute penalties, and B4 serves a 3-minute NR. But B2 is only serving 30-seconds for the technical (CF) foul. As such, B1, B2, B3, B4 and A1 must ALL serve the first 30-seconds, no matter if a goal is scored or not. After that, all releasables revert back to releasable (B1's slash and A1's body check) and the NR's simply remain NR (B3's USC and B4's USC ejection for his coach's behavior).

B2 gets released after 30 seconds, which marks the end of the common time all are stuck in the "box".

[LaxRef]

Here is what I have, but the Fed. rulebook is somewhat murky as you shall see:

NCAA:
B1 in for one minute releasable

B2 in home (or second attack player if B1 was in home) in for one minute NR.

B3 (additional attack player) in for one minute NR

B4 (additional attack player) serves 30 seconds releasable for the coach's conduct foul. Stacking procedure kicks in...he waits outside the penalty box until one of the above penalties is released...then he enters to serve the 30 seconds. Remember that the 30 seconds is served last...after the NR penalties. IN NCAA play you can only have 3 men in the box or no fewer than seven on the field.

In short the coach had 3 penalties...and according to NCAA rule 5-10 Note 1: "If a coach continues to be abusive after the penalty is assessed, the official may assess addditional penalty time that shall be served by an additional attack player."

This is all correct, and I will usually take advantage of this rule to put extra men in the box instead of giving the in-home one long NR penalty. However, in this situation, I might assign the conduct foul and a USC to the in-home so I don't have to explain the stacking procedure. The net effect is the same, except the coach has one more player available for the first minute of the penalty and no one has to worry about stacking.

You know, now that I look at it, the language about "addditional penalty time that shall be served by an additional attack player" only applies to USC and not to conduct fouls. Thus, maybe the right call here is for the in-home to serve the conduct foul and a USC and for an additional player to serve the other USC. In other words, I don't think that the stacked penalties should be used here according to the letter of the law.

[eme]

Rule 7-4 page 77 refers to fouls and makes no distinction between conduct fouls or unsportsmanlike fouls on the coach or any player not in the game:

"If a foul is called ...against someone other than a player in the game...the official shall select the in-home...If multiple fouls of this type occur, the referee shall assess the penalty time against an additional attack player..."

[CoachRob]

Stacking per se is not used in NFHS as it is defined in NCAA rules. Also, I agree with eme, in that I don't believe it restricts this to USC penalties. I think the following scenario I described above is correct:

B1 slashes (flag down) and gets sent off for 1-minute releasable
B2 serves the in-home releasable 30-second conduct foul for his coach
B3 serves the 1-minute NR USC penalty for his coach
B4 serves the 3-minute NR USC penalty for his coach (ejection)

But "I think" usually is only a temporary state of mind in my case...

You write The net effect is the same, except the coach has one more player available for the first minute of the penalty and no one has to worry about stacking.


I believe this is a HUGE difference in that by assigning penalties in the manner I described, the team plays with one less player for a full minute, not a trivial matter.

[LaxRef]

Stacking per se is not used in NFHS as it is defined in NCAA rules. Also, I agree with eme, in that I don't believe it restricts this to USC penalties. I think the following scenario I described above is correct:

B1 slashes (flag down) and gets sent off for 1-minute releasable
B2 serves the in-home releasable 30-second conduct foul for his coach
B3 serves the 1-minute NR USC penalty for his coach
B4 serves the 3-minute NR USC penalty for his coach (ejection)

But "I think" usually is only a temporary state of mind in my case...

You write The net effect is the same, except the coach has one more player available for the first minute of the penalty and no one has to worry about stacking.


I believe this is a HUGE difference in that by assigning penalties in the manner I described, the team plays with one less player for a full minute, not a trivial matter.

It is a difference. However, is it worth the 5:00 that it would take to delay the game to explain the stacking rule to the scorer's table (with no guarantee that they'll do it right)? This probably isn't an issue during Princeton-Syracuse, but in a USLIA game or a high school game played under NCAA rules, I still think I'd do it this way to avoid stacking.

Of course, I'd most prefer the NFHS solution and just put 4 guys in the box; it's one of the few rule differences for which I prefer NFHS over NCAA.

[eme]

Laxref:
You will love the Federation "mercy rule"...Rule 3-1-art.2

[CoachRob]

Just asked my rules interpreter. He said the CF goes against the in-home. If play restarts, then the first USC by the coach is assessed against the 2nd player listed; if play has not restarted, tack it on to the in-home's 30-second foul. If play starts and then the coach commits the 2nd USC (that gets him ejected), put the second attacker in the box. If it has not restated, tack that one on as well to the in-home. So...if the CF is followed by the 1st and 2nd USC's, all before play has restarted, the interpreter says the in-home serves ALL three penalties (4 1/2 minutes).

Makes sense actually.

BTW: if a player is ejected, that player leaves immediately and the in-home serves the penalty for him. The ejected player is no longer a player and is not eligible to serve any penalty time. Think of him as a coach, who also cannot serve any penalty time. While a penalty may be ASSESSED against a coach, he is not the one who serves the penalty; the in-home does. Same theory for an ejected player who is now a former player (also known as a spectator). Have you ever thrown a spectator in the box? No. So why would you throw a former player in there?

[Laxref_36]

I think eme is correct. The 30-second conduct fouls is served by the in-home (B2). An additional penalty would be served by the player listed below the in-home. In this case, the first 1-minute USC would be served by B3 (B3 in this case is the first attacker listed below the inhome on the line-up card); any further penalties get assessed against B4, then B5, etc.

I think that is the intent of the 3rd (and final) paragraph of NFHS 7-4.

Shrek,
What I am saying is that if BOTH teams commit time-serving penalties between the time the first flag is dropped during live play (for the slash in this case), and the whistle blows to start play again, are considered together for purposes of determining when they can be released from the "box". As such, the LEAST amount of time assessed in any single penalty is considered NR for all players who were sent off during this time period.

So, in my twist case:

B1 slashes (flag down) and gets sent off for 1-minute releasable
B2 serves the in-home releasable 30-second conduct foul for his coach
B3 serves the 1-minute NR USC penalty for his coach
B4 serves the 3-minute NR USC penalty for his coach (ejection)
A1 now gets sent off for what is NORMALLY a releasable 1-minute personal foul (non-vicious illegal body check for example).

Now, since BOTH teams have players sent off, the least amount of time is considered NR for all sent to the "box" during this time frame (any players from either team already in the "box" are excluded from the discussion below).

In this case, B1 (slash), B3 (USC), and A1 (body check) have all been assessed 1-minute penalties, and B4 serves a 3-minute NR. But B2 is only serving 30-seconds for the technical (CF) foul. As such, B1, B2, B3, B4 and A1 must ALL serve the first 30-seconds, no matter if a goal is scored or not. After that, all releasables revert back to releasable (B1's slash and A1's body check) and the NR's simply remain NR (B3's USC and B4's USC ejection for his coach's behavior).

B2 gets released after 30 seconds, which marks the end of the common time all are stuck in the "box".

Coach Rob I disagree, with your interpretation of when players are "stuck" in the box. It would be my view that in your scenario above A1, B1, B3 and B4 are all stuck in the box as A1's foul locks them all in. B2 is locked in as well, but can be released on time.

Check out page 86 7.6 Situation L 2005 NFHS.

[CoachRob]

Coach Rob I disagree with your interpretation of when players are "stuck" in the box. It would be my view that in your scenario above A1, B1, B3 and B4 are all stuck in the box as A1's foul locks them all in. B2 is locked in as well, but can be released on time.

Check out page 86 7.6 Situation L 2005 NFHS.

That's exactly what I said. Now, since BOTH teams have players sent off, the least amount of time is considered NR for all sent to the "box" during this time frame...

All four players are locked in for the minimum amount of time assessed, which in this case is 30 seconds for B2 (conduct foul). After B2's 30 seconds have been served, that ends the common time, and all players assessed RELEASABLE penalties (B1s slash and A1s body check) are reverted to releasable. Those sent to the box for NR penalties (B2s USC and B3s USC) must serve their total penalty time.

What EXACTLY do you disagree with? I don't follow. You seem to be saying the same thing as I am LR_36.

[LaxRef]

That's exactly what I said. Now, since BOTH teams have players sent off, the least amount of time is considered NR for all sent to the "box" during this time frame...

All four players are locked in for the minimum amount of time assessed, which in this case is 30 seconds for B2 (conduct foul). After B2's 30 seconds have been served, that ends the common time, and all players assessed RELEASABLE penalties (B1s slash and A1s body check) are reverted to releasable. Those sent to the box for NR penalties (B2s USC and B3s USC) must serve their total penalty time.

What EXACTLY do you disagree with? I don't follow. You seem to be saying the same thing as I am LR_36.

I think the issue is that since the maximum common penalty time on opposing teams is 1:00, then all of the penalties lock in for 1:00.

Consider: A1 gets 0:30 while B1, B2 get 0:30 and B3 gets 1:00. Then the first 30 seconds is locked in.

BUT, if A1 gets 1:00 while B1, B2 get 0:30 and B3 gets 1:00, then all penalties will be full time served.

The key is the common penalty time on *opposing players*, not the shortest penalty time given to ANY player.

[Laxref_36]

That's exactly what I said. Now, since BOTH teams have players sent off, the least amount of time is considered NR for all sent to the "box" during this time frame...

All four players are locked in for the minimum amount of time assessed, which in this case is 30 seconds for B2 (conduct foul). After B2's 30 seconds have been served, that ends the common time, and all players assessed RELEASABLE penalties (B1s slash and A1s body check) are reverted to releasable. Those sent to the box for NR penalties (B2s USC and B3s USC) must serve their total penalty time.

What EXACTLY do you disagree with? I don't follow. You seem to be saying the same thing as I am LR_36.

Coach Rob my disagreement has to do with the amount of time that the players are locked in for. Both A and B teams are locked in for one minute not 30 seconds. The minimum time that BOTH teams must serve is one minute (that's what makes them non-releaseable). In your scenario both teams minimum is one minute (A's foul). If at the forty five second mark of the fouls a goal is scored neither team is allowed to release a player (save B2 on time fifteen seconds earlier).

[CoachRob]

I think the issue is that since the maximum common penalty time on opposing teams is 1:00, then all of the penalties lock in for 1:00.

Consider: A1 gets 0:30 while B1, B2 get 0:30 and B3 gets 1:00. Then the first 30 seconds is locked in.

BUT, if A1 gets 1:00 while B1, B2 get 0:30 and B3 gets 1:00, then all penalties will be full time served.

The key is the common penalty time on *opposing players*, not the shortest penalty time given to ANY player.

NFHS 7-2.4: ....If the penalty time of a player(s) on one team is longer than the penalty time of a player(s) on the other team, then no one shall be released from the penalty area until the SHORTER penalty time has elapsed. At that time, the player(s) with the shorter penalty time shall be released from the penalty area. The other player(s) shall remain until such time as his penalty time has elapsed, or his team has been scored upon.


Nowhere does it state shortest time PER TEAM. So, in your example, even though A1 is the ONLY player from team A in the box, and his penalty is 1 minute while team B has 30- and 60-second penalties to serve, the player(s) with the shortest time are serving 30 seconds. It is this 30-second penalty which defines the time ALL players are locked in. After the 30 seconds have been served, all others are again releasable (unless they were NR fouls to begin with).

The reason for the term "opposing players" is that if B1, B2 and B3 are all sent off for releasables, and nobody from team A is sent off, then all B fouls are releasable. You need penalties on BOTH teams for 7-2.4 to take effect and have any players locked in. At least, that's how I read it and it was discussed at our lax ref meeting last night (yep, I decided to become a ref).

I don't know where you read that it is per TEAM. Is this a NCAA reference LaxRef? Rarely are you wrong, so I think that something is amiss here.

[LaxRef]

Nowhere does it state shortest time PER TEAM. So, in your example, even though A1 is the ONLY player from team A in the box, and his penalty is 1 minute while team B has 30- and 60-second penalties to serve, the player(s) with the shortest time are serving 30 seconds. It is this 30-second penalty which defines the time ALL players are locked in. After the 30 seconds have been served, all others are again releasable (unless they were NR fouls to begin with).

The reason for the term "opposing players" is that if B1, B2 and B3 are all sent off for releasables, and nobody from team A is sent off, then all B fouls are releasable. You need penalties on BOTH teams for 7-2.4 to take effect and have any players locked in. At least, that's how I read it and it was discussed at our lax ref meeting last night (yep, I decided to become a ref).

I don't know where you read that it is per TEAM. Is this a NCAA reference LaxRef? Rarely are you wrong, so I think that something is amiss here.

It's not written in the best possible way, but the intent is clear: if there are "simultaneous" fouls on opposing teams, they don't want one team getting their penalty released early and gaining an advantage just because they scored a goal. Consider:

Case 1: A1 gets 1:00, B1 gets 1:00. They're both locked in for a minute.

Case 2: A1 gets 1:00, B1 gets 1:00, B2 gets 0:30. They're still both locked in for a minute. If you only locked them in for 0:30, like you're proposing, and then team A scored a goal a 31 seconds, then team B would get 29 seconds of man advantage. That's clearly not what they're intending with this rule.

The key to the confusion is this:

If the penalty time of a player(s) on one team is longer than the penalty time of a player(s) on the other team, then no one shall be released from the penalty area until the SHORTER penalty time has elapsed.

In trying to allow for one or multiple "player(s)," they've muddied the waters about what "SHORTER" applies to. I contend that it applies to the shorter of opposite teams ("shorter" always applies to comparing two things, in this case "shorter minimum penalty time"; if they meant the minimum of all players involved, they'd need to say "shortest").

If you look at my case 1 and case 2, ask yourself why A1 and B1 should be eligible for an earlier release just because B2 happened to get a shorter penalty than either of them.

[LaxRef]

Here's some more support:

For the purpose of determining when a player or players may be released from a penalty, for all time-serving penalties called on players of opposing teams from the time the flag is dropped or the whistle sounds stopping play (whichever occurs first), until the sounding of the whistle resuming play, the lesser amount of penalty time shall be treated as non-releasable.

When two or more players from opposing teams are sent out of the game, and the penalty time for each player is the same, the players shall not be released from the special-substitution area until their full penalty time has been served.

If the penalty time of a player(s) on one team is longer than the penalty time of a player(s) on the other team, then no one shall be released from the special-substitution area until the shorter penalty time has elapsed. At that time, the player(s) with the shorter penalty time shall be released from the special-substitution area; but the other player(s) shall remain until such time as his penalty time has elapsed, or his team has been scored upon.

I think they make it clearer that "shorter" applies to people from opposite teams, not from the same team.

[CoachRob]

Case 2: A1 gets 1:00, B1 gets 1:00, B2 gets 0:30. They're still both locked in for a minute. If you only locked them in for 0:30, like you're proposing, and then team A scored a goal a 31 seconds, then team B would get 29 seconds of man advantage. That's clearly not what they're intending with this rule.

I don't know WHAT they're contending. However, according to YOUR interp., B2 gets slammed for 60 seconds (because A1, the only team A player foulin, committed a 1-minute PF), even though he committed a 30-second technical foul? Come on, that seems a bit over the top. If B1 gets a 30 second technical foul for a possession push and A1 punches him in the face and gets ejected, then by your logic, B1 now must get locked in for 3 minutes??? Are you really standing by this? I mean, 3 minutes for a possession push? I think you may have thrown a flag and hit yourself on the head here, LaxRef!

In trying to allow for one or multiple "player(s)," they've muddied the waters about what "SHORTER" applies to. I contend that it applies to the shorter of opposite teams ("shorter" always applies to comparing two things, in this case "shorter minimum penalty time"; if they meant the minimum of all players involved, they'd need to say "shortest").

Contend anything you like, but I think you've overstepped yourself here. You are correct in one issue w.r.t. shorter applying to something. SHORTER applies to the individual penalties. 30 seconds versus 60 seconds: which is shorter? 30 seconds is; thus, this is the locked in time.

From written English, when you compare TWO objects, the smaller one is called "shorter", as in "Jim is SHORTER than Stan". It would be incorrect to say "Jim is SHORTEST than Stan". It also works to say "Jim is SHORTER than Stan and Harry". It is incorrect to say "Jim is SHORTEST than Stan and Harry". So for English grammar, shorter is more universal in that it applies to three or more objects (penalties).

I just called my rules interpreter and he agrees with my stance. He also wonders how could you possibly lock in a 30-second tehnical push with possession against B1 for 3 minutes when A1 retaliates and punches B1? I think he used the term "crazy".
Shorter is shorter. 30 is shorter than 60, and therefore the 30 seconds is locked in.

eme, rilax, snake, LR_36, jump in here please.

[LaxRef]

I don't know WHAT they're contending. However, according to YOUR interp., B2 gets slammed for 60 seconds (because A1, the only team A player foulin, committed a 1-minute PF), even though he committed a 30-second technical foul? Come on, that seems a bit over the top. If B1 gets a 30 second technical foul for a possession push and A1 punches him in the face and gets ejected, then by your logic, B1 now must get locked in for 3 minutes??? Are you really standing by this? I mean, 3 minutes for a possession push? I think you may have thrown a flag and hit yourself on the head here, LaxRef!

You're misreading me. I'm saying A1 and B1 are still both locked in for a minute, as they were in case 1. B2 is locked in for the full length of his penalty, which is 30 seconds.



Contend anything you like, but I think you've overstepped yourself here. You are correct in one issue w.r.t. shorter applying to something. SHORTER applies to the individual penalties. 30 seconds versus 60 seconds: which is shorter? 30 seconds is; thus, this is the locked in time.

I'm saying that when comparing the times for two players put in the box from opposing teams, you look at the shorter time, and that's how long they are locked in. But if there are more than 2 players involved, you lock in for the shorter of (max time served by a player on team A) and (max time served by a player on team B).

From written English, when you compare TWO objects, the smaller one is called "shorter", as in "Jim is SHORTER than Stan". It would be incorrect to say "Jim is SHORTEST than Stan". It also works to say "Jim is SHORTER than Stan and Harry". It is incorrect to say "Jim is SHORTEST than Stan and Harry". So for English grammar, shorter is more universal in that it applies to three or more objects (penalties).

But it is incorrect to say the 30 seconds is the shorter of (30 seconds, 1:00, 1:00); you'd need to say "shortest" if you want to pick that out of a list of 3 or more.

I just called my rules interpreter and he agrees with my stance. He also wonders how could you possibly lock in a 30-second tehnical push with possession against B1 for 3 minutes when A1 retaliates and punches B1? I think he used the term "crazy".
Shorter is shorter. 30 is shorter than 60, and therefore the 30 seconds is locked in.

As I said, I never meant to imply that the 30 second penalty gets extended. It just becomes nonreleasable for the 30 seconds. You still haven't answered my main question: If A1 and B1 lock in for 1:00 in case 1, why should an additional technical foul from B2 for 30 seconds allow either team to get a man advantage out fo the situation? The whole point of the rule is to keep one team from scoring during the mutual short-handed situation and then having that team have to play man-down.

I looked through the ARs and they don't seem to have any simultaneous fouls with 3 or more players involved, but I'll be surprised if laxref_36 and I are misreading this. I could be wrong, but so could your rules interpreter. I'd like to hear what eme has to say on this.

[rilax]

This thread is getting confusing with quotes about quotes about seniors etc so I will just start from scratch.
This is how I understand 7-2-4:

First it only deals with time serving penalties of a live ball event and the dead ball event directly following it. I think everyone believes this.

Second it says that the penalties are locked in unless one teams penalty is longer and that portion of the penalty time becomes releasable. This is easy to do if there is only one player from each team is serving penalties under 7-2-4. If the times are the same the both are locked in however if A1 is serving more time the B1 then all of B1’s time is locked in and A1’s time is locked in until B1 is released (assuming B1’s does not receive more penalty time out side of the 7-2-4 event).

Now if there are multiple penalties against one team with a penalty against another the longest time a team A player is serving is compared to the longest time a team B player is serving. Note 7-2-4- sentence 3

If the penalty time of a player(s) on one team is longer than the penalty time of a player(s) on the other team, then no one shall be released form the penalty area until the shorter penalty time has elapsed.

The times that are compared is the time of one teams players against the other teams players. Therefore if team B had B1 push, and B2 slash and A1 had a two min unnecessary roughness penalty the 1 min slash on B2 is compared to the two min roughness call on A1. If all of the penalties where compared to see the shortest and only have 30 sec locked in it would be counter to the objective of 7-2-4 namely that goals scored in penalty time that was caused when both teams mutually disadvantaged there opponents does not result in the releasing of the penalties. Think of it in these terms. If in the incorrect hypothetical that A1, B1 and B2s penalties are released after 30 sec more than 30 but less than 60 seconds is expired after the 7-2-4 event team B scores a goal. This would allow A1 to be released but B2 would still be serving the reminder of the penalty even though A1’s disadvantaged the opposing team the most in the initial 7-2-4 event. This would be a fundamental breakage or the intent of 7-2-4 that is a team cannot release the opponents penalty time before all of there penalty time is relapsed from a 7-2-4 event.

[CoachRob]

If B1 is released after 30 seconds, and A1 and B2 and B3 are stuck for 1 minute as you contend, then B1 has violated 7-2.4 because he was released before the mutual time was served. He should be locked in for the lesser time which, according to you, would be 1 minute for A1. You simply cannot have it both ways. That is, lesser time for team B and then lesser time for team A compared to team B.

And talk about fair. Why should B1, who committed a possession push, have his 30 seconds become NR just because A1 punched him in the face? Now THAT'S unfair.

The "why" is because it's the rule. I don't understand WHY they did it, only that as the lesser amount of time as stated in 7-2.4, his 30 seconds IS locked in. Everything after that reverts to releasable unless they were NR. It's gonna take an earthquake to change my view on this one LaxRef.

[LaxRef]

Excellent post, rilax. I think you've summed up the salient points. The key point you made is this one:

If the penalty time of a player(s) on one team is longer than the penalty time of a player(s) on the other team, then no one shall be released form the penalty area until the shorter penalty time has elapsed.

I think this makes it clear that you're comparing the penalty time of the player with the longest penalty time among all players involved to the maximum of all penalty times on the other team. "Shorter" here refers to the the comparison of the player with the longest penalty time among all players involved to the penalty time of the opposing player with the longest penalty time.

The times that are compared is the time of one teams players against the other teams players. Therefore if team B had B1 push, and B2 slash and A1 had a two min unnecessary roughness penalty the 1 min slash on B2 is compared to the two min roughness call on A1. If all of the penalties where compared to see the shortest and only have 30 sec locked in it would be counter to the objective of 7-2-4 namely that goals scored in penalty time that was caused when both teams mutually disadvantaged there opponents does not result in the releasing of the penalties. Think of it in these terms. If in the incorrect hypothetical that A1, B1 and B2s penalties are released after 30 sec more than 30 but less than 60 seconds is expired after the 7-2-4 event team B scores a goal. This would allow A1 to be released but B2 would still be serving the reminder of the penalty even though A1’s disadvantaged the opposing team the most in the initial 7-2-4 event. This would be a fundamental breakage or the intent of 7-2-4 that is a team cannot release the opponents penalty time before all of there penalty time is relapsed from a 7-2-4 event.

This is what I've been saying!

As usual, the rules could be a little clearer, but in this case some of us are helped out by having some knowledge of the intent of the rule.

[rilax]

If B1 is released after 30 seconds, and A1 and B2 and B3 are stuck for 1 minute as you contend, then B1 has violated 7-2.4 because he was released before the mutual time was served. He should be locked in for the lesser time which, according to you, would be 1 minute for A1. You simply cannot have it both ways. That is, lesser time for team B and then lesser time for team A compared to team B.

And talk about fair. Why should B1, who committed a possession push, have his 30 seconds become NR just because A1 punched him in the face? Now THAT'S unfair.

The "why" is because it's the rule. I don't understand WHY they did it, only that as the lesser amount of time as stated in 7-2.4, his 30 seconds IS locked in. Everything after that reverts to releasable unless they were NR. It's gonna take an earthquake to change my view on this one LaxRef.

I have to strongly disagree. 7-2-4 only deals with a normally releasable penalty becoming non-releasable, not extending them. Also 7-2-4 may not be fair in the since that it always feels right the thing is that the fairness of the rules come from the correct interoperation of them in a uniform manner.

Also LaxRef I was not saying that you where wrong just that I wanted to start over cause I found the thread started to become a bit confusing onto itself.

[CoachRob]

NFHS Rule 7-2-4
If the penalty time of a player(s) on one team is longer than the penalty time of a player(s) on the other team, then no one shall be released from the penalty area until the shorter penalty time has elapsed.

All this means is that, if players from opposite teams have committed penalties, and the penalties are of different durations, it is the LESSER penalty time that is NR. Without this line, how would you know whether it is the LONGER or SHORTER time that is NR? Then we would all have a hissy fit, saying "Geez, why can't the darned NFHS tell us what to do when opposing players get penalties of different durations???" So they clarify it, and you guys want to run with it to an extreme that I don't believe they meant.

Rilax: If all of the penalties were compared to see the shortest and only have 30 seconds locked in, it would be counter to the objective of 7-2-4. Namely, that goals scored in penalty time that were caused when both teams mutually disadvantaged their opponents does not result in the releasing of the penalties.

And that'e EXACTLY what I'm saying. During that 30-second penalty, whereas B1 would NORMALLY be serving a releasable penalty, he gets locked in and a goal scored against his team does NOT release his penalty. He must serve the full 30 seconds.

Rilax: This would be a fundamental breakage or the intent of 7-2-4, that a team cannot release the opponent's penalty time before all of their penalty time is elapsed from a 7-2-4 event.

If this were true, then ALL PENALTIES would be locked in NO MATTER WHAT the duration. B1: 30 seconds, B2: 1 minute, B3: 1 minute, and A1: 3 minutes would ALL be locked in, as an early release would "break the intent" of the rule in your words. Suppose after B2 and B3 have served their 1-minute penalties (let's make them NR to satisfy you guys), and then team B scores a goal 1 second later. That means A1 gets 1:59 less penalty time than he was assessed? What is THAT all about? So B1, B2, and B3 all get STUCK in the box come hell or high water, but A1, who committed the most egregious penalty, gets to walk 1:59 early? No, I don't think so.

This is absurd. They state quite clearly If the penalty time of a player(s) on one team is longer than the penalty time of a player(s) on the other team, then no one shall be released from the penalty area until the shorter penalty time has elapsed.. If they wanted it YOUR way, they would have to state it in this manner:

"If both teams have players commit penalties of different durations, then each team shall by definition have one player who is serving the least penalty time among his teammates. It is this player's time that shall be compared to the opponent's minimum time. If one team's minimum penalty time is greater than the opponent's minimum time, it is the GREATER of the penalty times that shall define the non-releasable period to be served."

But they DON'T say that (in fact, they say the LESSER time), and NOWHERE do they state to compare time within one team to find the shortest; they simply state to compare times BETWEEN teams, and the lesser time is used to determine what time period is NR.

I can't go back and forth on this one any more guys. LaxRef, ask your rules interpreter or check in Philly at the convention. I'm worn out from this one. My rules interpreter sees it my way and that is how I intend to rule if/when I become a referee.

Lesser is lesser. Even Clinton can't parse that text. How in the world you guys made the jump to TEAM LESSER versus TEAM LESSER, and then use the GREATER of the TEAM LESSERS when it does not even come close to that wording, is honestly beyond me.

But your theory leads to a GREAT strategy. A1, seeing B1 get a 30 second, B2 a 1 minute, and B3 a 2 minute penalty, purposely slashes, trips, and cross checks B4, B5, and B6 to get 3 total minutes in penalty time. This way, he is sure B1, B2, and B3 must ALL serve their complete penalty times (3 1/2 minutes in total), and his team (A) gets a two man advantage for a full two minutes. Now THERE"S an idea!!!

Oh, that leads me to a question. Since A1's 3 minute penalty time is the LEAST amount of time assessed against HIS team, it must, by your definition, be NR. So, everybody serves NR penalties because A1 has 3 minutes to serve, and since it's the least time HIS team is serving, everybody serves full time because their penalties are less than his 3 minutes (and even though the rule states it is the "LESSER" time that has elapsed, we can now scratch that word out and replace it with "GREATER").

Somehow, I don't think so... :read:

[LaxRef]

Coachrob-

The easiest way to say this is that the common penalty time on opposing players is nonreleasable. No one is saying that 30-second penalties become longer if they're part of simultaneous fouls.

Let's wait for eme to get back from the convention; I'm sure he'll have something to say.

[CoachRob]

The easiest way to say this is that the common penalty time on opposing players is nonreleasable. No one is saying that 30-second penalties become longer if they're part of simultaneous fouls.
Agreed. You never said that. I probably misquoted you.

In it's simplest form:
B1- 30 seconds
B2- 1 minute
A3- 2 minutes

We all agree that the first 30 seconds are NR. That's clear.

But if you further force B2 to stay for the whole minute, then A3 can possibly get out of serving 59 seconds with a team B goal. Why should B2 be forced to stay for his full minute, but A3 not be forced to serve HIS complete penalty? It means the worst penalizer is the only player that possible gets the break???

That's why I feel it is the LESSER common time that is involved. That would be 30 seconds. That seems fairest, as the lesser amount of time is served by ALL players. After that, B2 can get released early, just as A3 can. In your method, the only player to get the benefit of a possible early release (sounds like prison, eh?) is A3, and that just does not seem fair to team B in any way.

Well see what eme thinks. But LR, why don't you call your interpreter and ask him???? Don't be stubborn. :ahhno:

[LaxRef]

Agreed. You never said that. I probably misquoted you.

In it's simplest form:
B1- 30 seconds
B2- 1 minute
A3- 2 minutes

We all agree that the first 30 seconds are NR. That's clear.

But if you further force B2 to stay for the whole minute, then A3 can possibly get out of serving 59 seconds with a team B goal. Why should B2 be forced to stay for his full minute, but A3 not be forced to serve HIS complete penalty? It means the worst penalizer is the only player that possible gets the break???

I think that's "just the way it is." The intent of the rule is to keep a team from getting into a man-down situation by scoring a goal during the common penalty time. You might as well ask why does ANYONE ever get released from a penalty just because the other team scores a goal right away.

That's why I feel it is the LESSER common time that is involved. That would be 30 seconds. That seems fairest, as the lesser amount of time is served by ALL players. After that, B2 can get released early, just as A3 can. In your method, the only player to get the benefit of a possible early release (sounds like prison, eh?) is A3, and that just does not seem fair to team B in any way.

Well see what eme thinks. But LR, why don't you call your interpreter and ask him???? Don't be stubborn. :ahhno:

Well, I *am* the local rules interpreter, and I've never gotten a response from my district interpreter on several previous questions, so I can't figure out why I should bother.

[CoachRob]

Then he isn't a good interpreter. This is why I'm not a ref.

And I didn't mean you were being stubborn. I just like that little gray face that shakes his head "No!". It's the cutest one of the bunch.

[CoachRob]

Just spoke on the phone with LaxRef_36 for about 30 minutes and I've POSSIBLY relented.

Situation:
B1: 30 seconds (conduct foul)---> flag down
B2: 1 minute (slash)---> second flag down
A3: 2 minutes (of the releasable type)---> blow whistle to end slow whistle.

B1 serves his full 30 seconds (that are now NR). The 1 minute is NR for B2 and A3. After that, A3 can be released by a goal scored against his team.

While the rulebook states LESSER time, it really should be the LESSER time of the team with the MOST time that is NR.

So, here, since A3 has the LEAST amount of time on his team (2 minutes), and it's GREATER than the LESSER time of team B (30 seconds), all penalties on team B that are equal to or less than A3's 2-minute penalty time is considered NR.

I'll ask my interpreter this week, but I believe this is the correct assessment. Worded poorly in the NFHS rulebook, but I now think it works for me.