[williebfree]

I am fairly thick-skinned and have years of experience dealing with (deescalating) coaches.

It appears that Mark's partner was/is still defining his role as an official and felt uncomfortable (challenged) by the HC and AC. Hopefully with time, this partner will develop a comfort zone with the authority and responsibility that is inherent with the position.

I understand some coaches are a destined for a train-wreck, despite proactive efforts to redirect them. To paraphrase an old proverb.... "You can appease some of the coaches all the time and all the coaches some of the time, but rarely can you appease all the coaches all the time." Based on the information provided by Mark, this was not a case where I would T the AC.


emmett8921

The variables you offer, justify a T. That coach challenged your judgement initially, but IMO he crosses the line when he gets personal "You Suck!"... His follow-up questioning was not necessary and should be considered a challenge of your integrity and resolve to enforce the rules.

Assuming you and your partner are positioned on the far side of the court (Away from the table and bench areas)....

The fact that the coach came to (at) you at half time demonstrates he would not "move on" with the game and wanted to once again posture "his" control. I would politely suggest he should focus on his players and get them ready for the 2nd half. If the coach insisted on arguing HIS case, I would offer him a free pass from the gym, via a 2nd T.