Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ignats75
...one of the other officials is required to be by the bench and how he handles the coach will be critiqued. I know first hand that ignoring a coach who has been teed that is trying to communicate his perspective is judged as poor game management. It happened to a partner of mine after I had whacked a coach. The assignor was in the stands and ripped my partner a new one after the game.
I don't paint little whistles on my car door for every time I whack a coach. I don't view coaches as part of the evil empire. I also recognize that they can cross a line and get teed. ALOT of the time, they realize it too and the T can get them to calm down which makes for a better game. If me or a partner can help them calm down, then thats good game management.
But helping them calm down doesn't mean I'm throwing my partner under the bus either. But a professional demeanor even after an incident can help defuse a situation. Ignoring a coach is NOT considered good communication skills and therefore not good game management.
OK...now bring on the flames.
|
Where are you officiating at? If you call a T in the second half, does an official have to be by the coach? I don't think so. Do you call two man or three man? In a two man game, does an official ever have to be by the coach? I don't think so.
You do NOT have to calm a coach down and if your assigner ripped you a new one then your assigner needs to learn a thing or two about how things are perceived. It shouldn't be necessary for an official to calm a coach down after an earned technical. Let the assistant - which you have probably already communicated with in length - calm down the coach.