Dumb Athletic Directors.

[HokieUmp]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

Mr. Senger, why be so antagonistic? The AD is entitled to ask the question and for him, it is relevant.

I believe Mr Senger commented the way he did because what you're asking is, in fact, no more germaine to the issue than when the AD asked. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I could offer the opinion that it's as if you're the AD or a minion, trying to draw him out. But I'm not, so I won't.

Maybe he wanted to light a fire under Mark for past issues and this was his chance. Either way, I don't see a reason to be antagonistic toward the people responsible for paying us.

I'd argue it's the bookkeeper that's responsible, with the principal approving, since the school pays the money, not the AD. And as to your "Maybe" - you think? That's the only reason I come up with for why the AD bothered to ask that detail. There may be some pockets of exceeding civility where there's another scenario, but in the real world, the AD's not looking to do anything but save his guy.

I see no harm in answering it honestly.

Me either, but where you seem to differ in opinion with many here is what constitutes an honest answer. "Mr X, that's not relevant to the issue at hand. Your player was ejected, and you have been notified. Please see my report for further details. Thank you." It's an honest answer, and since it sounds better than "It's none of your d--- business," it's fairly professional as well.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by HokieUmp

I'd argue it's the bookkeeper that's responsible, with the principal approving, since the school pays the money, not the AD. And as to your "Maybe" - you think? That's the only reason I come up with for why the AD bothered to ask that detail.

My guess: he's looking to score a rhetorical point with Mark. A condescending way of saying, "You shouldn't have ejected for such a petty reason." Socratic coaching; I've seen it on the basketball court.