over rule or not

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Simply The Best

Under your definition the crew has no integrity if they are willing to overlook a wrong call when one of the crew knows that is the case. Ultimately, it is all about how you perceive yourself as an official and a person and how you wish to lead your life, isn't it?

You obviously don't know what I mean by "crew integrity," so just keep on keeping on.

[Simply The Best]

Originally Posted by Simply The Best
Under your definition the crew has no integrity if they are willing to overlook a wrong call when one of the crew knows that is the case. Ultimately, it is all about how you perceive yourself as an official and a person and how you wish to lead your life, isn't it?

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

You obviously don't know what I mean by "crew integrity," so just keep on keeping on.

Could be. I take it to mean the crew's decisions, their fairness and their reputations as sincere arbiters of the game reflect their integrity as officials. Or lack thereof.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Simply The Best

Could be. I take it to mean the crew's decisions, their fairness and their reputations as sincere arbiters of the game reflect their integrity as officials. Or lack thereof.

No it means that if you are making decisions for your partners when an umpire/official is in the right position, every call or decision should be up for debate. And if every play is up for debate, a coach should every time he does not like a call go to the partner for "help" or to "get it right." This is why you use procedures to change things and not every call is up for debate no matter what your opinion is. That is what he is referring to, not sure what integrity has to do with this when an official is standing on top of a play and makes a judgment. Heck we all can have an opinion, but that does not mean our opinion from 100 feet away is right.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

No it means that if you are making decisions for your partners when an umpire/official is in the right position, every call or decision should be up for debate. And if every play is up for debate, a coach should every time he does not like a call go to the partner for "help" or to "get it right." This is why you use procedures to change things and not every call is up for debate no matter what your opinion is. That is what he is referring to, not sure what integrity has to do with this when an official is standing on top of a play and makes a judgment. Heck we all can have an opinion, but that does not mean our opinion from 100 feet away is right.

Peace

Exactly. It's more like the meaning of "hull integrity" when talking about a ship. "The quality or state of being whole or undivided."

Questioning your partner's calls will just give the coach more ammo; you may as well just toss him under the bus because you're telling everyone present that you think he just missed something so obvious that you had to come get it from 100 feet away.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Questioning your partner's calls will just give the coach more ammo; you may as well just toss him under the bus because you're telling everyone present that you think he just missed something so obvious that you had to come get it from 100 feet away.

And I have asked partners in many games "What did you see?" on a particular play that I had an opinion about, only to have them say they saw something I clearly did not. I have learned that what I "think I see" is not what might have happened. I tend to trust my partners and if I have information I will give it to them in the appropriate matter.

Peace

[Rich]

The troll talks so much about integrity and arrogance and I find it quite ironic -- to me, it's the height of arrogance to presume that I have a better (and correct) view from 100 feet away while the umpire a few feet away got it wrong.