The jacket is automatic, I believe.

What about reaction(s)? With how she acted throughout the game after the first T I'm not sure I have an issue with a ref saying seeya~

Throwing a jacket has always been automatic. Any crew that lets that go would have to explain that one to the supervisor. If Mulkey was going to get tossed I would've been much more likely to whack her for what she did at the end of the game than what she did following the first T.

Just fightin' for her gals.

Ha. Ha. Ha.

I couldn't agree with this first statement more! You would think that once they get hit with the first T, they'd realize there's a shorter rope, and they'd cool down a little bit.

But no, instead, they seem to think that now they've been whacked, it's gonna take EVEN MORE to get tossed, so they give 'em even more hell, RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE REPORT TO THE TABLE!

If this occurred in my high school game, I would have stopped mid-report to give her the heave-ho, and she would NOT have been allowed to stop and pick up her jacket on the way out.

Again, we all can say what we would've done, should've done, etc etc - but at that level, when everything you're doing is on videotape - you just have to be absolutely sure you're going to be validated for the actions you take. . .

The jacket toss - absolutely - it called itself and was overt where the entire world saw it and can't be debated.

Now, I don't know how everyone handles technical fouls and administration, but the first thing to do is just pop and walk away, which is what the official did. He reported the technical foul and went back opposite of where Mulkey was at - which is what EVERY REF should do. . .

The last thing you want to show on tape is where you're waiting for a coach to react to your technical foul (which every coach is going to react negatively to), and then ship them. . .

Now, if it was something where after the technical, she came out on the floor and was screaming and clapping her hands like a seal - again, those OVERT actions call themselves and the crew would've been validated in sending her out. . .

As for the end of game, it has to be something where she's screaming those profanities out loud, being out of her box, which she wasn't, and the hand gestures has to be incredibly overt. Again, for us, one negative outweighs a thousand positives we do out there and for them to send her for those things at 17 seconds left - the tape wouldn't have justified it. . .

To the one that states she was "sticking up for her gals" - I don't know if you meant that in a sarcastic manner, but Mulkey has always been, and always will be, about herself and that she's completely justified by what she calls emotions and how she cares about the game. . .

I will do it tonight when I get home. Any particular play she was going nuts over or just the entire minute? Either way works.

Peace

The one I recall was the foul with about 7 seconds left when OSU's PG drove and was fouled. Hit 2 FTs to put us up 3.

I saw the wave off too and I was talking loudly to the TV the official needed to dump her. OSU goggles not withstanding she needed to listen to the last possession from the locker room.

That's an opportunity for me to get in a few words myself.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

Those of us who work NCAAW will let the Forum know what is said about the situation on next fall's NCAAW officiating video since I'd be shocked if it isn't on it. Mulkey seems to have her own section every year.

Must-see TV?
 

Consider the NCAA's perspective. March Madness generates over $1B in revenue. Mulkey is must-see TV for her antics. In addition to her jacket's twitter feed -- not to mention the fact that the rare WBB game is being discussed on this board -- promotes NCAA WBB. More talk, more viewers, more ads, more revenue from media, etc.

Promote what you permit, right?

I know an official who T'd her years back in the tourney (no-brainer call), and predictably landed on her s*it list. Though a mainstay in tourneys, took 5 years before said official worked even a preseason game for her. Official said they'd do it again, but wouldn't climb over a partner to T her in the future. Times have changed, but don't underestimate coaches influence at high-visibility levels.

IS that because she comes up with new antics every year, or because the officials working her games continuously fail to enforce things the way they are told to enforce them?

I'm in agreement over the T for jacket toss. I guess though if I'm using the same scale as I would be responding to toddler antics:


4) Huffing/Footstomp - Ignore until I can't.
3) Complaining - Communicate to alleviate.
2) Throwing Items in Anger and Display of Aggression - Immediate Reaction and Consequence
1) Cursing at me/my decisions and waving me off - Immediate more severe Reaction and Consequence

If you don't get to the throw your jacket (and you don't), you don't get to curse at me and verbally and demonstratively be dismissive either.

You've had a toddler curse at you and wave you off?? :eek: