Coaching Box Q&A

[BoomerSooner]

Out of curiosity, how strictly do you guys adhere to the coach can't leave the box to sit on the bench?

Would you rule that the coach has terminated the right to use the box in any of the following scenarios:

The coach goes to the end of the bench (not within the box) and sits down to speak briefly with an injured player that is receiving medical treatment/attention. The coach returns to the box after assessing the players injury and ability to return to the game.

The coach leaves the box to retrieve a dry-erase marker, pen or some other item that he/she dropped (don't read this as threw in anger, because throwing stuff like a child should result in a TF and the box is gone anyway) or to retrieve some other item (jacket, clipboard, roster, etc) that is not within the coaching box.

No portion of the bench area overlaps the area designated for the coaching box. The coach goes to the bench and sits down for a brief period to rest, get a drink or speak with a player and remains on the bench for (a) while 2 FTs are attempted by either team (b) during an entire possession on either end of the court (c) for multiple possessions (d) during a timeout or between periods or (e) the duration of an entire period.

I ask because I've never seen any official treat the coaching box like it is a magical island that once it is left it can't be found again, but the rule book seemingly wants it to be treated that way. On another note, I've seen the coaching box marked as an entirely solid area contrasting in color with the sideline. Would anyone object to such a method of marking the coaching box?

[jTheUmp]

Common sense: If the coach isn't making it my problem, it isn't my problem.

[SC Official]

Coaching box enforcement is something that varies by state and even assigner.

[WhistlesAndStripes]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Coaching box enforcement is something that varies by state and even assigner.

...and even by official.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by BoomerSooner

Out of curiosity, how strictly do you guys adhere to the coach can't leave the box to sit on the bench?



Would you rule that the coach has terminated the right to use the box in any of the following scenarios:

The coach goes to the end of the bench (not within the box) and sits down to speak briefly with an injured player that is receiving medical treatment/attention. The coach returns to the box after assessing the players injury and ability to return to the game.



The coach leaves the box to retrieve a dry-erase marker, pen or some other item that he/she dropped (don't read this as threw in anger, because throwing stuff like a child should result in a TF and the box is gone anyway) or to retrieve some other item (jacket, clipboard, roster, etc) that is not within the coaching box.



No portion of the bench area overlaps the area designated for the coaching box. The coach goes to the bench and sits down for a brief period to rest, get a drink or speak with a player and remains on the bench for (a) while 2 FTs are attempted by either team (b) during an entire possession on either end of the court (c) for multiple possessions (d) during a timeout or between periods or (e) the duration of an entire period.

I ask because I've never seen any official treat the coaching box like it is a magical island that once it is left it can't be found again, but the rule book seemingly wants it to be treated that way. On another note, I've seen the coaching box marked as an entirely solid area contrasting in color with the sideline. Would anyone object to such a method of marking the coaching box?

I would not have a T for a single one of your scenarios. That would be like breaking into jail. Common sense.

Generally if the coach steps out of his box from time to time while actively coaching his players, I don't have a huge problem with it as long as A) he's not obstructing the table's vision, B) he stays out of the way of players and officials, and C) is not acting like a jackass. If he does any of these things (except maybe (C)), a polite request for cooperation is usually all it takes to make the problem go away. If it persists, perhaps a warning or a technical would be in order.

One note about exercising this kind of discretion. If the other coach is staying completely in his box and behaving like a saint, it's probably best to deal with the first coach sooner rather than later, because if you later have to deal with the saintly coach, the first thing he will say is, "Well you've let him work out of his box the entire game! So why are you hassling me?" And he would have a valid point.

Game awareness. Preventative officiating.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

..
One note about exercising this kind of discretion. If the other coach is staying completely in his box and behaving like a saint, it's probably best to deal with the first coach sooner rather than later, because if you later have to deal with the saintly coach, the first thing he will say is, "Well you've let him work out of his box the entire game! So why are you hassling me?" And he would have a valid point.

Game awareness. Preventative officiating.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've worked in front of a D3 coach who used to monitor what the other coach was doing and then comment about it in our ears. That guy is now a D1 coach.

[BoomerSooner]

I agree with all of the comments here. The thing I find interesting (and the biggest reason I posted the scenarios) is that just about every where I've worked or watched games, the mentality about this is the same despite the rule book suggesting we should be enforcing this differently.

I am wondering if I'm missing something though based on CrossCountry's response. He said he wouldn't have a T in any of my scenarios, but I was asking whether or not any of those actions would cause the coach to lose the opportunity to use the box. If we followed super-strict adherence to the rule and determined the coach lost the coaching box for one of the actions I described, wouldn't we just notify him/her that he/she can no longer use the coaching box. Then if he/she returned to the box after the notification, a technical would be given at that time? Am I accurate or does any action that causes the coach to lose the box also require a technical foul.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BoomerSooner

I agree with all of the comments here. The thing I find interesting (and the biggest reason I posted the scenarios) is that just about every where I've worked or watched games, the mentality about this is the same despite the rule book suggesting we should be enforcing this differently.

I am wondering if I'm missing something though based on CrossCountry's response. He said he wouldn't have a T in any of my scenarios, but I was asking whether or not any of those actions would cause the coach to lose the opportunity to use the box. If we followed super-strict adherence to the rule and determined the coach lost the coaching box for one of the actions I described, wouldn't we just notify him/her that he/she can no longer use the coaching box. Then if he/she returned to the box after the notification, a technical would be given at that time? Am I accurate or does any action that causes the coach to lose the box also require a technical foul.

If the coach begins the contest with the coaching box privilege, then the only way to lose it is due to a technical foul (whether direct or indirect).

My only quibble with the Iowa regulations for the coaching box is the one stating that the coach may not kneel. There is no rules support for that.

[bas2456]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

My only quibble with the Iowa regulations for the coaching box is the one stating that the coach may not kneel. There is no rules support for that.

Yeah I don't get that either. If a coach wants to stand on his hands for the entire game while within the box, I don't care. In fact I'd be pretty impressed.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bas2456

Yeah I don't get that either. If a coach wants to stand on his hands for the entire game while within the box, I don't care. In fact I'd be pretty impressed.

My belief is that the state governing body views this as a safety issue. They don't want a player or official who is running down the court to not see and be undercut by the kneeling coach.

So there is a rationale behind it. I just don't agree with the regulation.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

My only quibble with the Iowa regulations for the coaching box is the one stating that the coach may not kneel. There is no rules support for that.

Actually, the rule does support that. It says the coach must remain seated then lists exceptions, all of which are "may stand". No exceptions exist that permit anything other than standing. That said, I don't know of anyone that enforces it that literally, but it does say that.

SECTION 5 HEAD COACHES’ RULE
ART. 1 . . . The head coach shall remain seated on the team bench, except:
a. By state association adoption, the head coach may stand within the designated coaching box described in 1-13-2. The first technical foul charged directly or indirectly to the head coach results in loss of coaching-box privileges and the head coach must remain seated for the remainder of the game, except as stated below in 10-5-1b, c, d and e.
b. The head coach may stand within the coaching box to request a time-out or signal his/her players to request a time-out.
c. The head coach may stand and/or leave the coaching box to confer with personnel at the scorer’s table to request a time-out as in 5-8-4.
d. The head coach may stand within the coaching box to replace or remove a disqualified/injured player or player directed to leave the game.
e. The head coach may stand as in 10-4-4c and 10-4-4d.
NOTE: The head coach may enter the court in the situation where a fight may break out - or
has broken out - to prevent the situation from escalating.

[WhistlesAndStripes]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

If the coach begins the contest with the coaching box privilege, then the only way to lose it is due to a technical foul (whether direct or indirect)...

...unless you are in Iowa, in which case if you start in the coaching box, and then go sit down somewhere outside the coaching box, you have essentially forfeited your coaching box privileges for the remainder of the game.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Whistles & Stripes

...unless you are in Iowa, in which case if you start in the coaching box, and then go sit down somewhere outside the coaching box, you have essentially forfeited your coaching box privileges for the remainder of the game.

That would only be due to being charged with a technical foul for leaving the coaching box. It can't arbitrarily just be taken away.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BoomerSooner

Out of curiosity, how strictly do you guys adhere to the coach can't leave the box to sit on the bench?

Would you rule that the coach has terminated the right to use the box in any of the following scenarios:

The coach goes to the end of the bench (not within the box) and sits down to speak briefly with an injured player that is receiving medical treatment/attention. The coach returns to the box after assessing the players injury and ability to return to the game.

The coach leaves the box to retrieve a dry-erase marker, pen or some other item that he/she dropped (don't read this as threw in anger, because throwing stuff like a child should result in a TF and the box is gone anyway) or to retrieve some other item (jacket, clipboard, roster, etc) that is not within the coaching box.

No portion of the bench area overlaps the area designated for the coaching box. The coach goes to the bench and sits down for a brief period to rest, get a drink or speak with a player and remains on the bench for (a) while 2 FTs are attempted by either team (b) during an entire possession on either end of the court (c) for multiple possessions (d) during a timeout or between periods or (e) the duration of an entire period.

I ask because I've never seen any official treat the coaching box like it is a magical island that once it is left it can't be found again, but the rule book seemingly wants it to be treated that way. On another note, I've seen the coaching box marked as an entirely solid area contrasting in color with the sideline. Would anyone object to such a method of marking the coaching box?

Where are you seeing this? The only place in the rule book I see the coach losing the box for reasons other than a technical foul is this from 10.5.1 Sit A:

RULING: Legal. The coach is not required to use the optional coaching box even though it has been adopted by the state association. However, if the coach begins the game by sitting somewhere other than where the box is located, he/she may not use the box privileges any time during the game. The coach must begin the game in a position within the box if he/she wishes to stand when *permitted under the optional coaching-box provisions.

[BoomerSooner]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Where are you seeing this? The only place in the rule book I see the coach losing the box for reasons other than a technical foul is this from 10.5.1 Sit A:

RULING: Legal. The coach is not required to use the optional coaching box even though it has been adopted by the state association. However, if the coach begins the game by sitting somewhere other than where the box is located, he/she may not use the box privileges any time during the game. The coach must begin the game in a position within the box if he/she wishes to stand when *permitted under the optional coaching-box provisions.

10.5.1 A indicates a technical foul is to be issued there as well (unless they changed that this year...I looked it up in last year's book).

I think I was incorrectly taking the ruling that if a coach sits outside the box to start the game, he/she can't use it for the entire game and transforming it into the idea that if a coach leaves the box and sits on the bench outside of the box for any reason he/she loses the coaching box. Q#9 in the OP got me to thinking about this, but in reading the OP again, the answer provided didn't dictate the coaching box be lost. So I went back and reviewed the rules and the previous posts again. I guess my issue is that I've never thought of the coaching box like a prison that can't be left and I guess some of that stems from the fact that it isn't enforced like a maximum security facility. I don't think this whole discussion really change anything, but it does give me a better understanding of the rule.