Coach Berating Players

[billyu2]

I agree. The decision to leave the situation alone is within our jurisdiction and should not have been equated with "crawling under the bleachers." I apologize for making that statement!

[BillyMac]

As an official, I once heard a coach yell to his female high school varsity player, "Get your fuc..ing head in the game", as she dribbled past him. It bothered me. I mentioned it to the athletic director on my way out the door. He (the athletic director) thanked me, and said that he appreciated me mentioning it to him, and that he would discuss the issue with the coach.

[BryanV21]

How a coach conducts himself when it comes to the game, and how a coach conducts himself when dealing with his players, are two different things. I believe we officials are only meant to be concerned about the game.

Now, can a coach's actions towards his players carry over into affecting the game, thus putting us into a position to do something? I suppose. But until then I don't see where we should get involved.

If his actions/words do not carry over from his team's bench, huddles on the court during timeouts, or in the locker room, into the game then do we really have any jurisdiction?

Mind you, I'm only speaking of high school contests.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

How a coach conducts himself when it comes to the game, and how a coach conducts himself when dealing with his players, are two different things. I believe we officials are only meant to be concerned about the game.

Now, can a coach's actions towards his players carry over into affecting the game, thus putting us into a position to do something? I suppose. But until then I don't see where we should get involved.

If his actions/words do not carry over from his team's bench, huddles on the court during timeouts, or in the locker room, into the game then do we really have any jurisdiction?

Mind you, I'm only speaking of high school contests.

The NFHS has made it clear that language, for example, is within our jurisdiction. A coach doesn't get to address his players any old way, I just think we should be very careful and selective about when we respond.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Adam

The NFHS has made it clear that language, for example, is within our jurisdiction. A coach doesn't get to address his players any old way, I just think we should be very careful and selective about when we respond.

That would fall under his actions (or words, in this case) affecting the game. But using that language to his players, in and of itself, does not seem like grounds for us to get involved.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

That would fall under his actions (or words, in this case) affecting the game. But using that language to his players, in and of itself, does not seem like grounds for us to get involved.

The NFHS has stated otherwise. If he yells for a player to "Get your f32king head in the game", that's a T (for most of us) in spite of the fact that he's talking to his players. The NFHS has been more than clear that talking to players is not a reprieve from the sportsmanship rules.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Adam

The NFHS has stated otherwise. If he yells for a player to "Get your f32king head in the game", that's a T (for most of us) in spite of the fact that he's talking to his players. The NFHS has been more than clear that talking to players is not a reprieve from the sportsmanship rules.

I agree. This is an instance where his actions/words towards his players affects the game.

The fact that he may be disrespecting his players or whatever, is not in and of itself grounds for the technical foul.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

I agree. This is an instance where his actions/words towards his players affects the game.

The fact that he may be disrespecting his players or whatever, is not in and of itself grounds for the technical foul.

I'm probably arguing semantics at this point, but I don't see how his words to his player has any actual affect on the game, yet we call that. We would probably draw our line at a similar spot in practice, though.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Adam

I'm probably arguing semantics at this point, but I don't see how his words to his player has any actual affect on the game, yet we call that. We would probably draw our line at a similar spot in practice, though.

I'm just trying to find a separation between doing our jobs and doing the jobs of parents, ADs, etc.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

How a coach conducts himself when it comes to the game, and how a coach conducts himself when dealing with his players, are two different things. I believe we officials are only meant to be concerned about the game.

Now, can a coach's actions towards his players carry over into affecting the game, thus putting us into a position to do something? I suppose. But until then I don't see where we should get involved.

If his actions/words do not carry over from his team's bench, huddles on the court during timeouts, or in the locker room, into the game then do we really have any jurisdiction?

Mind you, I'm only speaking of high school contests.

Yes, they are two different things but all conduct during the contest comes under our jurisdiction including time outs and intermissions. Let's say during a time out a coach is screaming at his players. Okay, fine. But then, to drive home his point to the team, he slams his clipboard down and across the floor or kicks over a chair. Would you ignore that because it was in the category of "dealing with his team" and not part of the "game"? Our options in any behavior/conduct situations are: let it go, address the coach or penalize the coach. Sound judgement obviously is required. I do not think it would be wise to have my mind 100% made up that whatever a coach does in "dealing with his team" is not my concern.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by billyu2

Yes, they are two different things but all conduct during the contest comes under our jurisdiction including time outs and intermissions. Let's say during a time out a coach is screaming at his players. Okay, fine. But then, to drive home his point to the team, he slams his clipboard down and across the floor or kicks over a chair. Would you ignore that because it was in the category of "dealing with his team" and not part of the "game"? Our options in any behavior/conduct situations are: let it go, address the coach or penalize the coach. Sound judgement obviously is required. I do not think it would be wise to have my mind 100% made up that whatever a coach does in "dealing with his team" is not my concern.

In your situation the coach crossed the line from "being an ass to his players" to "disturbing the game by tossing his clipboard across the floor".

Again... trying to make a distinction between doing our jobs and doing the jobs of others. Which may be impossible without it being a HTBT thing.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

How a coach conducts himself when it comes to the game, and how a coach conducts himself when dealing with his players, are two different things. I believe we officials are only meant to be concerned about the game.

Now, can a coach's actions towards his players carry over into affecting the game, thus putting us into a position to do something? I suppose. But until then I don't see where we should get involved.

If his actions/words do not carry over from his team's bench, huddles on the court during timeouts, or in the locker room, into the game then do we really have any jurisdiction?

Mind you, I'm only speaking of high school contests.

Bryan, what is your definition of "the game"? I think you should forget about "the game" and review Rule 2-2-1 thru 4, Officials Jurisdiction. Article 3 in particular: "The officials jurisdiction extends through periods when the game may be stopped for any reason." The "game" is just one aspect. We are in charge starting when we arrive on the floor and ends when the final score is approved and we leave the visual confines of the floor. In other words, we don't get any "breaks" in between.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by billyu2

Bryan, what is your definition of "the game"? I think you should forget about "the game" and review Rule 2-2-1 thru 4, Officials Jurisdiction. Article 3 in particular: "The officials jurisdiction extends through periods when the game may be stopped for any reason." The "game" is just one aspect. We are in charge starting when we arrive on the floor and ends when the final score is approved and we leave the visual confines of the floor. In other words, we don't get any "breaks" in between.

I don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. I never said anything to the contrary.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by billyu2

Bryan, what is your definition of "the game"? I think you should forget about "the game" and review Rule 2-2-1 thru 4, Officials Jurisdiction. Article 3 in particular: "The officials jurisdiction extends through periods when the game may be stopped for any reason." The "game" is just one aspect. We are in charge starting when we arrive on the floor and ends when the final score is approved and we leave the visual confines of the floor. In other words, we don't get any "breaks" in between.

Look at it this way...

We don't remove problematic spectators from the game, we have police or administrators do that. So perhaps we shouldn't deal with coaches that verbally abuse their players, we should have administrators and others do that. UNLESS that coach disturbs the game.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Look at it this way...

We don't remove problematic spectators from the game, we have police or administrators do that. So perhaps we shouldn't deal with coaches that verbally abuse their players, we should have administrators and others do that. UNLESS that coach disturbs the game.

Now you are getting into site management! Yes, we can request police/AD's/administrator to remove unruly spectators and that's usually the way it happens because they rarely will do it on their own. But players, coaches and bench personnel are under our jurisdiction. If we penalize a coach and after the game the administration decides to suspend him from coaching for a while that's up to them. But if the coach's behavior needs to be addressed and you feel it is not your concern, go ahead. Request the police, AD, principal or custodian to come out and take care of it for you.