bballfanforever

Or you could continue to blame everyone but the folks who broke the rule or were residing for the players making sure that they followed the rule.

"Standing up and taking a step"? That's what they did? I highly doubt that was the case.

This was no celebration during a timeout. Equating those two circumstances is really reaching, imo. As for how far is too far, there were reports that most (if not all) of the Farragut players were at midcourt. I would suggest that's more than one step. I was not in attendance and haven't seen video either way, but players running onto the floor in a circumstance like this cannot be tolerated imo.

There's nothing arbitrary about it and any coach worth his salt had made sure that his players know it. Do not leave the bench. I would be surprised if these players had not been told to never leave the bench.

Now that's funny, right there. I don't care who you are.

Not to be argumentative, but do you suggest TSSAA should only exercise punishments on programs that have been successful (or could be in the near future)? I have no way to know if there were violations in the SDHS program, but in my opinion if any school is guilty of violations then the past (or possible future) success of the program should be of little importance when considering punishments.

HTV, I'm definitely no expert on TSSAA rules and I don't really have a dog in this hunt (so maybe I shouldn't even be participating in the discussion?) but it was/is my understanding that students must live with a parent /guardian in order to be eligible. I wasn't really addressing transfer rules, but rather questioning whether living with someone other than the parent /guardian would be in violation of TSSAA rules. The TSSAA sections that I referenced seem to suggest that living with the assistant coach would have violated those policies. If wrong, please correct me. I also offer no judgement on any coach or administrator, either. I have no way of knowing who knew what in this situation. From everything I've ever heard, Coach Duncan is a good man and well respected administrator and coach - and I've heard positive things about the principal as well. From these TSSAA sections, however, it seems to me there is some question here as to TSSAA compliance.

From the TSSAA handbook: Guardian – An adult with whom the student has lived for twelve (12) or more months. For purposes of TSSAA Bylaws, official appointment by a court is not required to establish guardianship; however, no person may be considered a guardian for purposes of these Bylaws unless the student has lived with that person for twelve (12) or more months, regardless of whether that person has been appointed as a guardian by a court. Also from the TSSAA handbook: Q. Is it possible for an athlete who does not live at home with his/her parents or guardians to become eligible? A. Yes. After such a student has attended school for a full school year, and has lived in the community in which the school is located for a period of at least twelve months, the student’s case may be submitted to the Executive Director for a ruling.

Oak Ridge probably shouldn't take that attitude, and I don't think they will. After all, they got a little payback due them. DC's trip to the 'Boro just got exponentially more difficult. You have to know that the fans from SH have to be extra pumped about this win.

As John Wooden once said when asked about it being tough to beat a good team three times in the same season, , "My answer is, would you rather fight somebody who’s whipped you twice or somebody that you’ve whipped twice?"

Exactly. As a coach, I teach my kids that officials make mistakes like all other people. I tell them that when they can make every shot, eliminate every turnover, and master the 'perfect game', then they can question a mistake by an official. We all screw up - coaches, players, and officials. It is inherent in humans. Officials are not created equally. Some are better than others. I do believe, however, that the overwhelming majority are trying to do their level best when they hit the floor.

If I am not mistaken, it is standard operating procedure for the lead official to check with each head coach at some point inside of the 10 minute mark during warm-ups to verify that all players are legally attired. If not, the required change must be made before the offending player takes the floor. The headbands were most likely in violation due to the logo (assuming they did not violate the color ruling). If that was the issue, I cannot see why turning them inside out would not have been acceptable, but if they were forced to remove them there was most likely a very good reason. As to blaming officials for losses, I used to tell my son: "Do you know how to spot a loser? He's the one complaining about the officials. Act like a winner even when you lose." Officials are human. They make mistakes and miss calls (yeah, some of them seem to be worse than others), but in 50 years of watching and participating in sports I can count on one hand the number of times that I have seen an official that I thought was out to get any particular team. Players commit turnovers. Players miss layups. Players miss wide open jumpers. Players miss free throws. Players expect officials, however, to be perfect. Coaches make mistakes in substitutions, misuse timeouts, and make strategic errors in offensive and defensive decisions. Many of them expect officials to be perfect, though. In my opinion, if most folks were completely honest they would actually tell you that they don't mind when officials make mistakes, so long as it benefits the team of their choice. You cannot expect officials to be perfect. You can only ask them to be consistent. Just my $0.02 worth.

The Riverdale schedule isn't top ten strength wise in AAA in TN according to coacht. #18 I think.

😭 😭

This has nothing to do with 'hate'. You stand on your moral high horse and espouse beliefs and attack those who have different views from your own? You do not know me. You have no knowledge of what kind of person I am. Yet you accuse me of 'hating' because you made what I consider a completely idiotic comment and I questioned it. Just so you understand, my post that you replied to had nothing to do with the suspension/firing of these people. Maybe you meant to reply to my earlier post, and if so that would at least be more relevant. It would not excuse your hatred of me, but it would have at least been relevant. (See what I did there?) I accused you of hatred without even knowing you. I assure you that it was done tongue-in-cheek, and I apologize if it offended you.