After the Coach Technical

ref2coach

Speaking to a friend of mine who attended the CCA camp in Las Vegas. He told me that one of the NBA guys who was doing the film break down on his game told him that "Following a TF issued to a coach that the next foul or violation should be on that coach's team". He stated that to often the next several calls following a TF favor the team whose coach was sanctioned and that leaves the opposing coach questioning if he should get a TF to restore balance.

Have any of you ever been instructed likewise.

Adam

ref2coach wrote
Speaking to a friend of mine who attended the CCA camp in Las Vegas. He told me that one of the NBA guys who was doing the film break down on his game told him that "Following a TF issued to a coach that the next foul or violation should be on that coach's team". He stated that to often the next several calls following a TF favor the team whose coach was sanctioned and that leaves the opposing coach questioning if he should get a TF to restore balance.

Have any of you ever been instructed likewise.

OMG no.

Seems like classic "leave it" advice.

Berkut

I would say that "Following a TF issued to a coach that the next foul or violation should be on whichever team commites the next foul or violation".

Of course, I am just a high school basketball official, so take that with a grain of salt.

fiasco

This is one of those all-too frequent occasions at camp where you smile, nod your head, say "okay" and throw the advice in the trash when you walk out of the gym.

bbcof83

I can see the point but the advice seems misguided.

Might be giving coaches a little too much credit too. You think they are that perceptive and deeply analytical in the heat of a game? Doubtful.

Adam

I can see telling some one to make sure and not let that T affect your calls afterwards, but not a blanket statement like that. Good grief.
If you're worried about the other coach, why aren't you worried about the first coach thinking you're out to get him?

Mark Padgett

Man, I would love to know which NBA ref it was who said that. Maybe the NBA would like to know, too.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I know that I always hope that the next foul or violation that I call after whacking a coach is on his team, but more often than not, the gods of basketball seem to have me call a foul or violation on the opponents of the coach whom I have just whacked.

MTD, Sr.

[deleted]

ref2coach wrote
He told me that one of the NBA guys who was doing the film break down on his game told him that "Following a TF issued to a coach that the next foul or violation should be on that coach's team".

I'm sure there was more said in the beginning or at the end of what was posted here 🙄

icallfouls

At one time I subscribed to this idea.

But the real meaning is that the calling official needs to be ready to make the next tough call even if it goes against the coach that recieved the T. Have the intestinal fortitude to keep calling the game that is in front of you. Sometimes the next foul is in your lap and it goes against the team that just got T'd. Get it right and move on.

BillyMac

Berkut wrote
Following a technical foul issued to a coach, the next foul or violation should be on whichever team commits the next foul or violation

Words of wisdom. Not bad for just you're fifty-third post.

Back In The Saddle

I've heard a similar philosophy from a respected college D1 guy. His take was, after giving a coach T, make sure the next whistle on the other team is a good one. If your next whistle is a "cheap" one, then the coach thinks, "That's good. I bought that one."

But that's an order of magnitude less controversial than the one presented here.

Hugh Refner

Back In The Saddle wrote
I've heard a similar philosophy from a respected college D1 guy. His take was, after giving a coach T, make sure the next whistle on the other team is a good one. If your next whistle is a "cheap" one, then the coach thinks, "That's good. I bought that one."

But that's an order of magnitude less controversial than the one presented here.

Hey - here's an idea. Why not make sure all your whistles are good ones and not "cheap" ones? Naaah - that would never work.

Raymond

Hugh Refner wrote
Hey - here's an idea. Why not make sure all your whistles are good ones and not "cheap" ones? Naaah - that would never work.

So all your whistles have been good? Never a lapse in judgement or concentration?

Hugh Refner

BadNewsRef wrote
So all your whistles have been good?

Yes. Although I did have one once that had a little chip on the side, but I filed it down and then it worked just fine. 🙄

rockyroad

Ch1town wrote
I'm sure there was more said in the beginning or at the end of what was posted here :rolleyes:

Ya think?? 😛

I think so, too...somehow the whole message was pared down to what the friend told the OP'er. Somehow I don't think that was the point the "NBA guy" was trying to get across.

Back In The Saddle

Hugh Refner wrote
Hey - here's an idea. Why not make sure all your whistles are good ones and not "cheap" ones? Naaah - that would never work.

Here's an idea, why not just participate in the conversation without being a sarcastic ***? Hey, that just might work!

bob jenkins

bbcof83 wrote
You think they are that perceptive and deeply analytical in the heat of a game? Doubtful.

If by "perceptive and deeply analytical" you mean "paranoid", then , yes, I think that coaches are that way.

mbyron

Back In The Saddle wrote
Here's an idea, why not just participate in the conversation without being a sarcastic ***? Hey, that just might work!

Killjoy. 😛

Back In The Saddle

mbyron wrote
Killjoy. :p

Dangit, now I need a new monitor and keyboard. 😀