Quote:
Originally posted by zebraman
So because you had a scorer screw up once, you'll never follow the rule to notify the coach again? Yeah, that makes sense. :-)
|
No, but if you want to believe that, go right ahead. Actually the philosophy that I have about this, has nothing or very little to do with that particular game. Part of it is that there is a faction of officials that believe that coaches know and scorers for their teams can tell them, and they do.
Quote:
Originally posted by zebraman
You have said before that in your games, the scorer usually notifies the coach directly.... I don't see how if the situation is any better if the coach is pissed off at the scorer than at you... in fact, it's probably worse.
|
Well because in my area, or around the state in the games I have officiated, the coaches rely heavily on "their scorers" for information. Whether it is timeouts, foul sitautions or who has the number of fouls. Maybe that is not the case where you live, but coaches are always talking to the table, when they have a question asking "their scorekeeper" for that kind of information. But I guess you feel like I should do their job for them?
Quote:
Originally posted by zebraman
If a referee is afraid to go near the bench to notify a coach that they are out of time-outs, as required by rule, there must already be a problem between the coach and the ref.
|
I know this, when they changed the timeout situation from so many twenty timeouts to so many full timeouts, it has been very common place to have the coach tell me him or herself what their situation is. When you ask a coach "what kind of timeout do you want," and he says, "I only have a 30." I guess I should go back and tell him again what he already knows.
Quote:
Originally posted by zebraman
Don't blame poor game management on a rule that you choose to ignore or call everyone who can manage the situation smoothly a "rulebook referee." That's cowardly.
Z
|
At the end of the day,
this is a philosophy. Just like I have in every single sport I officiate, there are rules and there are philosophies. You could never be a football official, because the rules do not make a distiction at the NCAA or NF what is a hold and how to call one. But there is a book out telling you how to call that and many other things, regardless of what the rulebook states. And it is not unusual to find the philosophy of holding to be called based on where the point of attack is, a very widely held philosophy in football alone.
Just because the rule says one thing, does not mean that everyone (and they do not) apply the rules the exact same way. Outside of folks like yourself on this board,
not a single official I have ever come in contact with makes an issue out of this at all. Only folks that have nothing else better to do and probably cannot call a simple foul correctly, but you worry about things like this. Folks here keep saying "it is a rule," so what!!! It is a rule that has no consequence, I have never been told by an assignor if I did not tell a coach how many timeouts they have, I will not work in their conference. I have never been told that if I do not follow this to the letter, you will not work in their conference. You cannot even decide if the Referee tell the coach or any official tells the coach. Whether to go into the huddle or whether to wait until after the huddle breaks. The main advocates of this rule cannot even decide how it is to be handled, but I am suppose to go along with your ideals (which I will not) and apply this rule, when there are absolutely no consequences for this not being done. And if the coach is too stupid to know how many timeouts he called, too bad. This happen this weekend at a camp and not one evaluator got on the officials for the coach not knowing the situation. And in their words, "you have better things to worry about."
I will digress.
Peace