JOEY WRIGHT TECHNICAL FOULS AND EJECTION

[@BengtsonJ]

2 Technicals that are charged to the COACH throughout a game requires an ejection. If either of those 2 were a BENCH Technical then there has to be a THIRD technical for an automatic ejection.

[@TheAshman36]

Umm yeah I don't see anyone questioning that anywhere here

[@BengtsonJ]

Steve Carfino needs some idea lol

[@TheAshman36]

Ahh Steve Carfino he is a shocker when it comes to rule knowledge - actually most of the commentators are

[@themasonexperience6844]

Joey Wright and Will Weaver Battle would be crazy

[@basketballindustry7069]

THX SSOOOOO MUCH FOR REPLYING. BTW u r right about the awards

[@LachStur05]

2 Technical fouls is an automatic ejection it has been even in the 2014 FIBA basketball rules which is what the NBL uses and it was a disqualification foul which equalls 1 shot for the Technical and 2 shots for the disqualification foul.

[@tylerrogers3782]

I think that the official was just conveying that the Coach was ejected.. And just so we are clear... 2 class C technical fouls are an automatic ejection.. But if you have conduct so egregious on the first instance you can issue a DQ foul and the offender is gone and it is 2 shots for the opposition.

[@TheAshman36]

But you don't have to signal an ejection from the game, 2 class C technical fouls is definitely an ejection from the game. I dont believe the behaviour was unsportsmanlike to warrant an escalation from a technical foul, I agree he deserved a technical foul. You can see when the 2nd of the foul shots was taken there was some confusion why there was going to be a third foul shot i.e. not everyone appeared to know what was going on

[@Deselse]

The ball hit the ring from a rebound attempt. Not a shot attempt. I.E the shot clock doesn't reset.

[@milart12]

I was just about to chime in with this--has to be a shot attempt

[@ilyazhitomirskiy9218]

There was a try for goal by Black 35 that hit the ring before the shot clock horn went off. It may have looked ugly, but it was a legal try. Thus, the ruling of no shot clock violation and a 14-second reset was correct.

[@michaelhogg324]

@@ilyazhitomirskiy9218 WRONG cause the original shot did NOT hit the rim! That is the one that is supposed to be the violation and NO reset of the shot clock but a Shot Clock Violation!

[@aussiesurfer805]

yes it does reset - it makes no difference if it’s a rebound attempt, shot attempt or bounces off the floor onto the refs head then hits the rim. If the ball hits the rim, the shot clock resets. If it was how you suggest, it becomes a “judgement call/opinion call” instead of a simple time elapse call as per the rule (24s to take a ‘shot’ that hits the rim), because what is a rebound to you could (and probably is) a putback/tip attempt by an elite level player.

[@EPNProductionsOnline]

If a coach is charged with Two Technical Fouls, they are disqualified from the game. If their bench is charged with Three, or a combination of Two Bench and One Coach Technical, again they are disqualified. This is the right call.

[@michaelhogg324]

It didn't hit the rim on the initial shot which should have been the shot clock violation! It did hit the rim on the put back but it is too late!

[@FortheLuIz]

There should be a tech for NZ trying to play basketball.

[@braydenellul489]

FortheLuIz yeah

[@toddhogg9500]

Devon, you mean to tell me that it isn't a shot attempt? Yes, it is! But the thing is cause I couldn't tell at first but on the replay, it did hit the rim! As for the Technicals you can be tossed! Here in the US you can be tossed for 1 and it is 2 shots, unless it is the NBA! Or is that the Austrailian rules? Help me out here.

[@NelsonM47]

I know I’m 5 years late here, but the ball hit the rim, but it has to be off a shot no? Anyway Joey deserved techs haha

[@LukeVader2003]

please explain: Did he have a technical foul before the technical/disqualifying foul had been given? Also, do we still signal a desqualifying foul after a second technical foul has been given? Thanks :)

[@TheAshman36]

He did already have one technical foul, disqualifying foul is a different type of foul really. Normally you would signal a technical foul and then tell them to leave because it was their second technical foul, you wouldnt normally signal a technical foul and a disqualifying foul for the same infraction

[@LukeVader2003]

so in this instance if only one technical foul was intended to be given, the referee should have signaled a technical foul and then told him to leave. Then only one free throw should have been taken? Correct? If a dq was intended then there should still only be 2 free throws? right? but tbh the behaviour didn't seem to need a dq

[@TheAshman36]

The first technical foul was also called during the same game stoppage, so assuming it was 2 technical fouls it should've been 1 + 1 free throw and side ball NZ, instead it was 1 + 2 free throws and side ball NZ

[@brendanpetty7418]

All the ref had to do was explain that the ball hit the rim. All that joey was asking. Not once did they explain it. Clock went off, was NZ ball. This came after 5 mins of terrible calls before

[@jayharris2235]

Exactly

[@basketballindustry7069]

SOBEY MVP, SOBEY MVP

[@TheAshman36]

Randle MVP, Sobey MIP (Most Improved Player), Wright COTY, Ferguson ROTY. 36ers have the awards wrapped up

[@themasonexperience6844]

@@TheAshman36 go United!!

[@basketballindustry7069]

R u a Adelaide fan. If so than I am too

[@TheAshman36]

Yes I am

[@rubyruff2713]

No it hit the rim defntley

[@Thesportsmusicgod]

Yes he deserved to be disqualified