Dumb Athletic Directors.

[johnnyg08]

Seems to me like you could've answered the question w/o coming off as unapproachable.

It's a pretty simple question really. I think you made a mountain out of a mole hill.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

Seems to me like you could've answered the question w/o coming off as unapproachable.

It's a pretty simple question really. I think you made a mountain out of a mole hill.

I do not think Mark is making a big deal out of anything really, rather I think the people here are. And I am also going to take a wild guess that this is not common for an AD to ask much of any questions during this process, at least not in the situations that Mark is familiar. If he answered the questions then what? Was he going to change his opinion either way?

AD should not be having conversations with officials (IMO) about any call. The AD should have taken the information and moved on too. I am assuming they have some things to do with the information. I doubt they have any it matters "why" the ejection took place.

And if he thinks he is unapproachable, so what? He does not have to approachable to any coach about what he does on the field. The ADs job is to make sure that the officials are there and pay them or file all the proper paper work. At least that is their job where I live.

Peace

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

Meanwhile, over on the AD board, the AD is griping about the umpire that refused to help him understand what constituted swearing so he could counsel his players.

Then the AD is pretty stupid because the first thing Mark stated was the use of the f-bomb if what caused the ejection.

Here in CT, we just file the report, we do not contact the AD's.

[David B]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

That said, there's no way I would eject a player for Mark's situation. I'd probably just tell him to watch his language. Making a kid sit 1+ games for dropping a single f-bomb in frustration simply doesn't meet the spirit and intent of the rules, IMO. Making him sit the rest of the game doesn't meet the spirit and intent, either, IMO.

On the topic of language: The F4 and F6 in last night's ballgame were engaged in a colorful conversation while I was in the B position. Some of words used were the same types of words I used when I was 16-18 years old. Finally, I turned to the F4 (who was genuinely a nice, funny kid) and said, "My innocent ears can't handle this." He laughed and they continued the conversation by replacing those words with nonsensical ones -- just kids being kids. Of course, anyone who's followed my postings knows how I feel about profanity -- as long as it's not directed towards me or an opponent or not done in an unsportsmanlike way, I really don't care too much. I'll stop it if it's overboard, but in the way I did last night -- certainly not with an ejection.

I see your point and completely agree with that. Kids are gonna be kids, and as you stated, if not done in an unsportsmanlike way, its not that big a deal. Easy to tell them knock if off etc.,

Thanks
David

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

Then the AD is pretty stupid because the first thing Mark stated was the use of the f-bomb if what caused the ejection.

Here in CT, we just file the report, we do not contact the AD's.

If it's stupid to try to learn the parameters then you have a pretty stupid definition of stupid.

[Stu Clary]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

AD: Do you always eject a player for swearing?

MTD, Sr.: Mr. Xxxxx that question is not germain to the subject we are discussing. Xxxxx Xxxxx's actions is why I am calling.

AD: But I am asking the question so I can understand why you ejected Xxxxx Xxxxx.

MTD, Sr.: Mr. Xxxxx, your original question is not germain to Xxxxx Xxxxx ejection.

AD: Yes, it is. I want to know if you always eject a player for swearing?

MTD, Sr.: Mr. Xxxxx, the MichiganHSAA requires me to make contact with a school adminstrator when there is a player ejection and inform the adminstrator that a game report will be filed.

AD: But, I want to know if you always eject a player for swearing to be able to understand your actions.

MTD, Sr.: Mr. Xxxxx, this conversation is over. Goodbye. "click"

Why didn't you just answer the AD's simple question? You come off looking bad here, IMHO.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

If it's stupid to try to learn the parameters then you have a pretty stupid definition of stupid.

I will ask again. Why does the AD need to know anything about "why" for this portion of this policy? Is the ejection going to be rescinded if he/she does not like the reason for the ejection or the personal policy of the umpire?

Peace

[Stu Clary]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I will ask again. Why does the AD need to know anything about "why" for this portion of this policy? Is the ejection going to be rescinded if he/she does not like the reason for the ejection or the personal policy of the umpire?

Peace

Who cares? He asked a simple question, he should get a simple answer. By being evasive, the umpire opens himself up to criticism.

Perhaps the AD saw this as a teachable moment?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Stu Clary

Who cares? He asked a simple question, he should get a simple answer. By being evasive, the umpire opens himself up to criticism.

Perhaps the AD saw this as a teachable moment?

OK then if "who cares" is the answer, then who cares what the reason for the motivation for the question or why Mark did or did not answer the question. If it was me, I could give a darn why an AD wants to know, that is not part of the policy. And as I said before, I would not care what an AD thought about my decision on the field. I do not have to answer to them as I am sure most here do not have to either. You cannot have it both ways.

Peace

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

If it's stupid to try to learn the parameters then you have a pretty stupid definition of stupid.

And what part of f-bomb don't you and the AD understand? It's a JV game which is an extension of the classroom, so the f-bomb is not allowed nor tolerated. You want to keep splitting hairs about this, Rich?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

First of all, Rut, my check to you is in the mail and you should receive it Monday. Second, I want to apologize in advance for this long post.

Third. There are a number of officials who think that:

1) The OhioHSAA and MichiganHSAA policies requiring the official/umpire to make contact with a school adminstrator the next school day is not a good idea. I have been an OhioHSAA registered official since 1971 and a MichiganHSAA registered official since 1984. I was registered by the FloridaHSAA from 1973 to 1977, and a member of the Southern Calif. Bkb. Off. Assn. from 1982 to 1984.

While in Florida and California I had the undesireable duty of filing game reports for player ejections. During those years neither the FloridaHSAA nor the California Interscholatic Federation had no formal game report form to complete. I can not remember if (and I do not feel like climbing up into the attic to rummage through forty year old files; those who read the Basketball Forum will understand that comment) contacting a school adminstrator was a requirement in those days (I do not think it was.). But I do know that game reports at that time were a he said/she said affair. Nothing good ever game of them because StateHSAA did not have penalties in place for ejections.

The same situation that was in Florida and California was in place in Ohio and Michigan until the early 90's (that's 1990's for the basketball guys reading this post). It was about that time that the OhioHSAA and MichiganHSAA adopted penalties for ejections and both orginzations adopted almost identical game report forms and ejection protocols. The forms were in triplicate with one copy going to the State, one copy to the school, and one copy to the official. The school also received a form to complete. It allowed for a very limited response. And that response was practically dictated to them by the State. The response had to state that the school had taken the appropriate punitave steps as required the StateHSAA Rules and Regulations. The StateHSAA would not accept and he said/she said response from the school. I can only speculate, that Ohio and Michigan requirment of the official notifying the school is so that the school principal, who may not have been at the athletic event and therefore may not know yet of the ejection will be notified in a timely manner and that he will be receiving a game report.

In recent years both Ohio and Michigan has gone to an online reporting system, but still require the phone call to the school administor. Michigan's is 100% online, and Ohio's is psuedo online (no need to explain because it is not germain to the discussion).

2) I did not handle the AD appropriately. Rut and others, as well as myself, have stated that game reports are to be short, succinct (something I am not very often, ), and sweet. Meaning the report needs to be on point and nothing else. That also applies to the notification of the administrator.

Everybody here knows that I can go on flights of fancy and hyperbole and very capable of making a short story long (case in point: this post, ). Every official has his own tolerance for profanity, the F-bomb, the N-word, taunting, and other unsportsmanlike conduct. That tolerance is also determined by the sport being officiated because one sport's penalities for such conduct can not easily be applied to another sport's penalities for such conduct.

Those who post on the Basketball Forum know my position on profanity, the F-bomb, the N-word, taunting, and other unsportsmanlike conduct. I guess one could describe me as old school (Note to Basketball Forum readers: Not that Old School.). I was raised to compete in a way that one could play hard, have emmotion, repsect your opponent, and still conduct onself as a lady or gentleman on the field of competition. Sadly, there are certain elements within the world of sport who find that philosophy quaint to say the least.

I believe that I handled my conversation correctly and I am not alone in this position. That is, a sports official's official comments should be succinct and to the point. They should be germain to the subject being discussed and nothing more. There is a good reason for this position: Silence can not be misquoted and is very difficult to be quoted out of context.

I think I have said enough for a while.

MTD, Sr.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

And what part of f-bomb don't you and the AD understand? It's a JV game which is an extension of the classroom, so the f-bomb is not allowed nor tolerated. You want to keep splitting hairs about this, Rich?

I am not getting this splitting of hairs either. We throw people out in baseball (or it is advocated) all the time in other areas of baseball, but we want warnings for players using the most unacceptable words? Really?

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

First of all, Rut, my check to you is in the mail and you should receive it Monday.

I will send you the wire transfer number as that might come quicker than a check (do not get me started!!! ).

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Everybody here knows that I can go on flights of fancy and hyperbole and very capable of making a short story long (case in point: this post, ). Every official has his own tolerance for profanity, the F-bomb, the N-word, taunting, and other unsportsmanlike conduct. That tolerance is also determined by the sport being officiated because one sport's penalities for such conduct can not easily be applied to another sport's penalities for such conduct.

Those who post on the Basketball Forum know my position on profanity, the F-bomb, the N-word, taunting, and other unsportsmanlike conduct. I guess one could describe me as old school (Note to Basketball Forum readers: Not that Old School.). I was raised to compete in a way that one could play hard, have emmotion, repsect your opponent, and still conduct onself as a lady or gentleman on the field of competition. Sadly, there are certain elements within the world of sport who find that philosophy quaint to say the least.

And in baseball unlike even basketball or football, there are no penalties that can be used before an ejection. With that being said, I know many officials in basketball and football that would eject anyone use for the use of these words listed above without much exception. I am not sure I agree with that personally, but I know those that have no exceptions and that is their right to have those standards. I do not hold onto that position only because if I ejected a player for that I would have to eject everyone soon for similar language. And just like anything in life context matters to me. It is different if you are saying something to yourself for making a bad play and no one can hear you, then saying something to me as an official or to an opponent.

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I believe that I handled my conversation correctly and I am not alone in this position. That is, a sports official's official comments should be succinct and to the point. They should be germain to the subject being discussed and nothing more. There is a good reason for this position: Silence can not be misquoted and is very difficult to be quoted out of context.

I think I have said enough for a while.

MTD, Sr.

And this is another reason that many states do not require such conversation with anyone at the school. When we have an ejection in Illinois, all we do is file what is called a Special Report. This is done online and the information is sent directly to the AD and Principal of that school. We are not to contact the school or the IHSA about the result or punishment. The same would go if someone filed a Special Report on us. We do not contact the school or official to get clarification. Nothing good can come out of that. If the IHSA wants to talk to us, they can contact us for clarification. But those reports should be specific and to the point. No editorializing what we think or why we think the events took place. We give the exact words and the rules that apply and some facts about when it took place in the game.

Peace

[Dave Reed]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I will ask again. Why does the AD need to know anything about "why" for this portion of this policy? Is the ejection going to be rescinded if he/she does not like the reason for the ejection or the personal policy of the umpire?
Peace

Jeff,
No, the ejection isn't going to be rescinded. However, the school may choose to add their own punishment, as I pointed out in post #7 of this thread.

As an example, some schools think that a one game suspension is more than enough for a momentary outburst. They may wish to add on if it was the F-bomb followed by "you", or perhaps preceded by "you mother..".

At the time that the AD took the call, he presumably has no way to know if the ejection report will include the detail and color necessary to decide if additional punishment is necessary.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Dave Reed

Jeff,
No, the ejection isn't going to be rescinded. However, the school may choose to add their own punishment, as I pointed out in post #7 of this thread.

As an example, some schools think that a one game suspension is more than enough for a momentary outburst. They may wish to add on if it was the F-bomb followed by "you", or perhaps preceded by "you mother..".

Wouldn't that be in the written report? Maybe I missed something back in the early part of this conversation; there is a written report right? Now I am going to assume that the reason there is even a policy to contact the schools is there is not an online or email component to such information like there is in my state where the Special Report is sent to schools and appropriate school administration when we file the report.

Originally Posted by Dave Reed

At the time that the AD took the call, he presumably has no way to know if the ejection report will include the detail and color necessary to decide if additional punishment is necessary.

Again without knowing the overall process of this policy I cannot answer to that or if the AD knew anything. But I would have likely stuck to the written report and not editorialized what is usual or common. If that is not supposed to go in the report, not sure I would have did that with the AD either. I doubt I am alone in that standard because all Mark could have done is made the situation worse by telling everyone what was typical for him personally.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Again without knowing the overall process of this policy I cannot answer to that or if the AD knew anything. But I would have likely stuck to the written report and not editorialized what is usual or common. If that is not supposed to go in the report, not sure I would have did that with the AD either. I doubt I am alone in that standard because all Mark could have done is made the situation worse by telling everyone what was typical for him personally.

This reminds me of a conversation I once had with a state administrator who called me and asked me questions about a game that I'd already submitted a report for. He got annoyed, I think, when I read the report to him on the phone -- he said, "I got your report, you don't need to read it to me."

Well, when he asked, "What happened," my first thought was that I had sent a pretty thorough report. It was all in there.