|
Nevada
If the refs in my cases used your rule, I would have had two Ts, because in their rulebook, they were right.
As for 10-4-1b, why does it matter if the rule reference is right or wrong? It is the act of trying to influence the decision, not rules knowledge that matters here. Same could be said for any other provision.
If the coach is repeatedly disagreeing with calls, repeatedly questioning your judgment, does it really matter if he knows the rules or not? Likewise, if he only asks about one call, does it matter if he is ignorant of the rulebook? Nothing in any of those rules implies that it is ok to engage in this activity if you have rules knowledge.
And your argument that you train coaches to meet a higher standard than some of the referees we have doesn't wash with me. I know that you know I make the effort to know the rules. But refs are paid to know the rules, and I know them as well or better than many sub-varsity refs, and better than a few varsity refs that I personally know (not many - that seems to be a pretty good cut-off point around here). Most coaches don't know the rules that well. But depending on what level you are reffing, you frequently have a volunteer part-time coach who has to know a lot that you do not need to know (how to run a practice, manage parents, schedule a season, set up offense and defense, etc.).
Is it right to hold these individuals to that standard of knowledge of the rules, rather than work to get them to a better level?
My first time coaching, my team got a 5 seconds call and I never knew the rule had changed since I was in HS. My player was dribbling and got the ball below the hash mark - we were good from my perspective. If I had gotten Td rather than educated when I questioned the call, I would have left with nothing but disrespect for the refs and no greater rules knowledge then I entered the gym with. Instead I learned how much I didn't know, and started working to know the rules better.
|