Quote:
Originally Posted by lmeadski
I am a more frequent reader than poster here. In many of the threads I see refs referencing their comments to/with coaches. Some of you clearly call the game with minimal interaction while others are sarcastic, especially with the belligerent coaches (and maybe it's just what you'd like to say...).
Regardless, I believe a number of our less respected refs have little or no interaction with the coaches (many of our refs SPRINT off the court after the game...). Many of our most revered refs are great "game managers" which requires regular coach interaction. My questions: is there room for sarcasm, especially in a tense game? Do any of you find value in "managing" the coach in pre- and/or post-game? And, do you use their first names during games or always refer to them as coach? Other input besides answers to these questions are welcome.
Thanks.
|
I think that one of the biggest complaints coaches have about officials is, "Officials won't talk to me." This can be a slippery slope, but the officials that I have tried to emulate were the ones who were willing to admit a mistake every now and then, concede that they MAY not have had a great angle on a particular play, and were willing to give at least a brief explanation on a tight/controversial play. There can be a fine line between answer a question every once in a while and explaining call after call.
I will always address the coach as "coach" unless I am in close proximity to him/her in a situation in which they are the only one that will hear. In these cases, I will frequently use their first name. It is a little more personal.
I will joke about a play -- especially if it has to do with the officiating crew -- with a coach from time to time. Generally, you know it's pretty safe if the coach is smiling or laughing about something that just happened.
BUT, as some have already indicated, using humor should come with the warning, "PROFESSIONAL at work, use caution."