The Official Forum
Page 4 of 5 « First 23 4 5
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Best ways to find time for coaches (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/100918-best-ways-find-time-coaches.html)

BillyMac Sat Feb 20, 2016 06:47pm
This (Below) Was On My Hard Drive ...
 
Coach is questioning a partner’s call:

“Coach, that’s a good call, as a crew we have to make that call.”
“We’re calling it on both ends.”
“Coach, he/she was right there and had a great angle.”
“Coach, we’re not going there, I can’t let you criticize my partner.”
“Coach, he/she had a great look, but if you have a specific question, you’ll have to ask him/her, he/she’ll be
over here in just a minute.”
“Tell me, I’ll ask him.”

Source: Topeka (Kansas) Officials Association

BryanV21 Sat Feb 20, 2016 08:12pm
Ok, thanks. If I have done this like I thought I have, I'm glad it didn't blow up in my face.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

Camron Rust Sun Feb 21, 2016 12:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp (Post 981761)
Here is an example from something that happened in my association. A coach didnt like a travel call against his player. A possession or 2 later he asks one of the non-calling official who was in front of him about it. After the exchange, the coach yells across the court, "See, even your own partner didnt think it was a travel." The non-calling official would later explain that "all he did" was answer a hypothetical about if the kid had done X blah blah blah." But the coach took it and ran with it and was trying to divide and conquer like many coaches like to do.

Again, there is just no upside to trying to relay info on judgement calls. None. If your partner has time to tell you, then he can find time to tell the coach. If its that important. Again, 98% of the time its not. And most of the time the coach doesnt even really want an explanation. They are trying to manipulate the situation and gain an advantage for the next call.

Bottom line is that trying to relay info does nothing to improve communication with the coach and often can lead to problems. Its too easy for things to get lost in translation even if you quote your partner verbatim.

I agree that communication with coaches is important. But being a middle man is not the way to do it.

That has nothing to do with this situation. The official in your situation wasn't commenting on a previous call.

BigCat Sun Feb 21, 2016 12:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam (Post 981764)
If I'm the partner who talked about the hypothetical and the coach did that, we're all getting a short free throw break.
Agree. That's an automatic with a "sit down and not one more word to or about us.... Or you can go sit on the bus."

VaTerp Sun Feb 21, 2016 01:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 981803)
That has nothing to do with this situation. The official in your situation wasn't commenting on a previous call.
He engaged in a conversation about a previous call.

I know the details of the situation even if they are not conveyed perfectly here.

Its a relevant example.

Camron Rust Sun Feb 21, 2016 02:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp (Post 981806)
He engaged in a conversation about a previous call.

I know the details of the situation even if they are not conveyed perfectly here.

Its a relevant example.
You said yourself he didn't ask about a call and that the official didn't relay anything about his partner's call. The coach asked about something else and only then turned it into being about a prior call. That is entirely on the coach, not the official.

River Ref Sun Feb 21, 2016 01:33pm
Too much talking (not good). Answer a question as short and polite as possible. "This is how I saw it from my angle coach" etc. Continue talking and I may say something I regret and same goes for the coach. Less talk and less possibilites of a T. A T that I might of provoked.

VaTerp Mon Feb 22, 2016 12:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 981810)
You said yourself he didn't ask about a call and that the official didn't relay anything about his partner's call. The coach asked about something else and only then turned it into being about a prior call. That is entirely on the coach, not the official.
No I didn't. In fact I clearly stated that he asked about the call.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp (Post 981761)
A coach didnt like a travel call against his player. A possession or 2 later he asks one of the non-calling official who was in front of him about it.
The entire conversation was about the previous call and I put "all he did" was answer a hypothetical in quotes for a reason. This official himself uses this as an example of why not to engage with coaches about partners' calls.

Its not the exact same thing as "relaying" info from a partner but to say it has nothing to do with the situation here is being obtuse.

Its all part of the larger point about not engaging in conversations with coaches about partners' calls because coaches will often just try to use it to their advantage or try to divide and conquer the crew in hopes of getting calls moving forward. I think most see the relevance.

My advice to the official who was thinking about relaying info from a partner was, and is, to simply get away from that line of thinking altogether for the reasons that have been stated multiple times in this thread.

VaTerp Mon Feb 22, 2016 01:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam (Post 981764)
If I'm the partner who talked about the hypothetical and the coach did that, we're all getting a short free throw break.
The official involved said he thought about going there but decided against it b/c he realized he made a comment that could have been construed that way. The coach set up a trap and he fell for it.

There are others who feel that he should have rang him up anyway. The debate continues to this day.

BigCat Mon Feb 22, 2016 01:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp (Post 981941)
The official involved said he thought about going there but decided against it b/c he realized he made a comment that could have been construed that way. The coach set up a trap and he fell for it.

There are others who feel that he should have rang him up anyway. The debate continues to this day.
He used one partner against the other. That's one reason to ring him up. Yelling across the court is another. Personally, I don't see much room for debate on this one.

Dad Mon Feb 22, 2016 01:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp (Post 981941)
The official involved said he thought about going there but decided against it b/c he realized he made a comment that could have been construed that way. The coach set up a trap and he fell for it.

There are others who feel that he should have rang him up anyway. The debate continues to this day.
I'll take a punch if I screwed something up. This isn't taking a punch and I'd bet my car the coach knew exactly what he was doing.

I'm not allowing this. I'm more likely to allow a coach to tell me to f*** off.

VaTerp Mon Feb 22, 2016 01:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCat (Post 981944)
He used one partner against the other. That's one reason to ring him up. Yelling across the court is another. Personally, I don't see much room for debate on this one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad (Post 981951)
I'll take a punch if I screwed something up. This isn't taking a punch and I'd bet my car the coach knew exactly what he was doing.

I'm not allowing this. I'm more likely to allow a coach to tell me to f*** off.
I tend to agree. The official addressed the coaches comment but said he didn't want to T him and compound his mistake.

You could make the argument that he compounded it by not sticking him as well.

The larger point, IMO anyway, is that he would have had no qualms issuing the T had he not put himself in a bad position to begin with by engaging with the coach on a partner's call.

Adam Mon Feb 22, 2016 02:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp (Post 981941)
The official involved said he thought about going there but decided against it b/c he realized he made a comment that could have been construed that way. The coach set up a trap and he fell for it.

There are others who feel that he should have rang him up anyway. The debate continues to this day.
I get that he felt used at the time, and I'm not saying he was wrong to not call the T.

I'm calling it, however, and not losing a moment's sleep over it. And frankly, I'm calling it as either official in this exchange. If I'm the one across the court, I'm only giving my partner about 2 seconds to blow his whistle before I blow mine.

Camron Rust Mon Feb 22, 2016 04:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp (Post 981958)
I tend to agree. The official addressed the coaches comment but said he didn't want to T him and compound his mistake.

You could make the argument that he compounded it by not sticking him as well.

The larger point, IMO anyway, is that he would have had no qualms issuing the T had he not put himself in a bad position to begin with by engaging with the coach on a partner's call.
I still disagree that the conversation was specifically about the partner's call. It was, indirectly, only when the coach turned an innocent answer against the partner.

If, after a few trips up and down the court after some call by a parnter, a coach asks me about a rule, I'm answering a rules question without any comment on a partner's prior call. If it is right away, it is clear it is about that call and I'll refer them to the calling official (unless I know I had the same thing). If my partner gets a rule wrong, that is not on me. It is not my job to know my partner kicked a rule 5 possessions ago such that I have to avoid talking about that rule in the future. I will have said nothing about whether my partner was correct or not.

The coach should have been T'd when he twisted it around against the prior call.

VaTerp Mon Feb 22, 2016 10:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 982006)
I still disagree that the conversation was specifically about the partner's call. It was, indirectly, only when the coach turned an innocent answer against the partner.

If, after a few trips up and down the court after some call by a parnter, a coach asks me about a rule, I'm answering a rules question without any comment on a partner's prior call. If it is right away, it is clear it is about that call and I'll refer them to the calling official (unless I know I had the same thing). If my partner gets a rule wrong, that is not on me. It is not my job to know my partner kicked a rule 5 possessions ago such that I have to avoid talking about that rule in the future. I will have said nothing about whether my partner was correct or not.

The coach should have been T'd when he twisted it around against the prior call.
There can be variance of opinions on issuing a T. I'm pretty sure I'd call it myself in that situation though I understand why the official involved didnt.

Speaking of which, have you talked to the official involved about this situation? Because I have. Mutliple times.

HE HIMSELF USES IT AS AN EXAMPLE OF WHY NOT TO ENGAGE IN CONVERSATIONS WITH COACHES ABOUT PARTNERS CALLS.

So it doesnt matter what you agree or disagree with here. Whether or not the conversation was about the previous call is not a matter of opinion. It is fact. Your mention of a kicked rule 5 possessions later has nothing to do with what we are talking about. I think I get what point you are trying to make about this being on the coach but its strange the length you are willing to go in order to do so.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:09pm.
Page 4 of 5 « First 23 4 5
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1