Jump to content

Supplemental Ejections/Disqualifications


LRZ

Recommended Posts

All you PIAA umpires, take heart!  PIAA has your back!

Several years ago, Pennsylvania's PIAA instituted a supplemental disqualification category with an enhanced penalty. Usually an ejection or disqualification carries a one-game suspension, but an egregious case can be upgraded to a two-game sit-out. PIAA reviews all ejections and disqualifications. In filling out the form, the reporting official can check a box raising the DQ to a supplemental; if the official does, PIAA can deny the enhanced penalty; if the official does not check the box, PIAA, on its own, can increase the penalty to two games.

Here is the language from the on-line reporting form: 

A Supplemental Disqualification is triggered when a Coach or contestant is ejected from a contest and a component of the disqualification is the act(s) of confronting, contacting or addressing a Coach, contestant or official using foul or vulgar language, ethnic or racially insensitive comments or physical contact. This section is NOT intended for other infractions described as “rules of the game” or actions which do not meet the above criteria.

On Saturday, in a jv soccer match, I issued a red card (disqualification) to a player, filed the report and did not check the supplemental box, as I did not think the conduct rose to the requisite level of severity; my chapter interpreter disagreed with my red card, opining that the conduct was only worthy of a caution/yellow card.  On Monday, PIAA responded, informing me that I misapplied the rule, that the situation satisfied the requirements for a supplemental report, and that the player would sit for two games, not just one.

Tough lesson for a 14-15 y/o HS kid to learn, but a necessary one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 5
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm in no place to judge the PIAA but, I will say that more state scholastic athletic associations need to look at adding a suspension of some kind anytime an ejection takes place. In baseball, of course, we have ignore, verbal warning, written warning, restriction to the dugout and finally ejection. There are or course magic words and actions that allow us to go VFR straight to the ejection. So, that's 5 opportunities within the framework of a baseball game for someone to avoid an ejection. If you get to 5 and get ejected, you either aren't getting the message about what is proper conduct on a baseball field or you don't care. Neither of which is ok.

My state has a fine to the school anytime there's an ejection, which I also fully support. That gets the school itself directly invested in solving the problem.

But, without a suspension...without time away from the game, and I think it should include practice and any official team functions, those who get ejected aren't really addressing what lead to their ejection. It's just too easy to get ejected, think you've flushed it mentally and then show up at tomorrow's game and believe all is well.

I also saw someone post here that a scholastic league out in Los Angeles ends the game as a forfeit on any ejection. I'm sure that appears nuclear...and I'm also sure their ejections/games played ratio is the lowest in the nation.

Sports are an emotional human experience and we can make room and allow for that until it turns personal, persistent and or profane.

~Dawg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PA is trying to deter misconduct in school athletics. We've had some ugly incidents in recent years, and PIAA apparently realized that a standard, one-game suspension was an inadequate deterrent. Hence the enhancement and the PIAA authority to impose it even if the official does not check the box.

A player who gets a supplemental DQ must complete an on-line NFHS sportsmanship program and provide his/her principal with certification of completion, which the principal then submits to the district chair in that sport. This is in addition to the enhanced, two-game suspension.

When a coach is DQ'ed supplementally, he/she must complete both the NFHS Sportsmanship program and a "Teaching and Modeling Behavior" program, then provide certification to the principal. This, also, is in addition to the two-game suspension.

My soccer case was interesting because I, as the official on the field and the target of the player's misconduct, did not think the player's conduct warranted the enhanced penalty, but PIAA disagreed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to be nit-picky, but a two game suspension is much different in football than it is basketball or baseball.  Football they play 10 games, so 2 is 20% of season.  Basketball plays like 30-40.  Id prefer a “percentage sit”.

Lets say 1 game in football, so 10% of season, or 2 (20%) for severe penalty.  So basketball kid with a 30 game schedule sits 3/6 games, etc.

In baseball, a starting pitcher is suspended for 4 games and they don’t even miss a start. An nfl player sitting for 4 games can ruin their season

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, LRZ said:

All you PIAA umpires, take heart!  PIAA has your back!

Several years ago, Pennsylvania's PIAA instituted a supplemental disqualification category with an enhanced penalty. Usually an ejection or disqualification carries a one-game suspension, but an egregious case can be upgraded to a two-game sit-out. PIAA reviews all ejections and disqualifications. In filling out the form, the reporting official can check a box raising the DQ to a supplemental; if the official does, PIAA can deny the enhanced penalty; if the official does not check the box, PIAA, on its own, can increase the penalty to two games.

Why have the official do anything regarding suspensions if PIAA reviews all of them and makes the decision anyway? That sounds like an unnecessary step that can lead to conflict.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Matt said:

Why have the official do anything regarding suspensions if PIAA reviews all of them and makes the decision anyway? That sounds like an unnecessary step that can lead to conflict.

The official's report starts the review process. Then, PIAA reviews it (1) to determine if the EJ/DQ was justified or not, and (2) to determine if the EJ/DQ merits the enhanced penalty, regardless of whether the official checked that box.

I have no stake in whether PIAA overrules, affirms as is, or enhances. I just officiate, tossing offenders when necessary. But your comment about potential conflicts, Matt, actually arose in the case I related--but it was between my chapter/district interpreter and district representative, on one hand, and me. They didn't like how I drafted my report and that I issued a red card, instead of a yellow. The state apparently had no problem with either my language or my card, disagreeing only on the implications for supplemental enhancement. PIAA acted to support officials, I was told, but the local "powers that be" do not share that concern.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.






×
×
  • Create New...