Best ways to find time for coaches

[Dad]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

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]

Originally Posted by BigCat

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.

Originally Posted by Dad

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.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

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]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

. 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.

Quite the opposite, I'm just not going to try to remember what my partners called all game to know what questions I should or shouldn't answer. If it is right after the play, I'll send them to my partner if they want more info. 5 plays later, that prior play is in the past.

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Quite the opposite, I'm just not going to try to remember what my partners called all game to know what questions I should or shouldn't answer. If it is right after the play, I'll send them to my partner if they want more info. 5 plays later, that prior play is in the past.

Ok....agreed but that has nothing to do with the situation I shared.

We'll just move on.