"Protect" partner or let him TKOB?

[SC Official]

This happened in a recent game where I was U1.

Young U2 (who does a great job and has some college experience) is in the home coach's doghouse from the getgo. Late in the second quarter, he whacks a home team player for taunting, and predictably the coach goes nuts. As partner is reporting the T, rather than him getting to deal with the coach himself, the R comes in and makes him go opposite. (The coach yelled "We can't have softness in my gym!" which I thought was T-worthy but I wouldn't step over the R or U2 to whack him.)

The sentiment of the U2 in the dressing room was that the R coming in added fuel to the coach's perception that the U2 was incompetent and needed to be protected by his veteran partner. The R was adamant that he did the right thing by getting the U2 out of the way of the coach and not calling a T on the coach. The R said we should go opposite after calling any T (not just one on a coach), which I don't think makes sense under high school mechanics. (Obviously the typical expectation when a coach gets whacked is for the calling official to go opposite.)

I tend to agree with the U2 in that he was more than capable of handling the coach by himself and that nothing good came from the R stepping in attempting to "save the day." If the coach needed to be whacked, so be it, and it seemed like the R was only interested in preventing that, which I thought was wrong.

Anyone disagree with me or have other thoughts?

[Camron Rust]

Without being there, hard to really know.

Going opposite is not a bad idea after a T. If nothing else, creating the space will either let the coach settle down or make it blatantly obvious he's earned the T. I don't like the R forcing that so visibly, however. In a discussion, the R and the U2 could have come to that agreement.

[APG]

Ideally:

If I call a player T, I'm gonna stay tableside...I'll be the one to force a switch opposite if need be. If I'm the partner, I'm not going to force a switch UNLESS I know I'm working with a newer official.

Ideally, after the T is called, me (or other partner) is getting to the calling official before he/she reports/administers anything. At that point, one can judge/ask about what happened, and if the official wants to stay or go opposite.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by SC Official

This happened in a recent game where I was U1.

Young U2 (who does a great job and has some college experience) is in the home coach's doghouse from the getgo. Late in the second quarter, he whacks a home team player for taunting, and predictably the coach goes nuts. As partner is reporting the T, rather than him getting to deal with the coach himself, the R comes in and makes him go opposite. (The coach yelled "We can't have softness in my gym!" which I thought was T-worthy but I wouldn't step over the R or U2 to whack him.)

The sentiment of the U2 in the dressing room was that the R coming in added fuel to the coach's perception that the U2 was incompetent and needed to be protected by his veteran partner. The R was adamant that he did the right thing by getting the U2 out of the way of the coach and not calling a T on the coach. The R said we should go opposite after calling any T (not just one on a coach), which I don't think makes sense under high school mechanics. (Obviously the typical expectation when a coach gets whacked is for the calling official to go opposite.)

I tend to agree with the U2 in that he was more than capable of handling the coach by himself and that nothing good came from the R stepping in attempting to "save the day." If the coach needed to be whacked, so be it, and it seemed like the R was only interested in preventing that, which I thought was wrong.

Anyone disagree with me or have other thoughts?

Camron and APG are two veteran officials that make excellent points.

But I would like to make one observation and one comment (which will no doubt make me ramble on):


Observation: SC Official in his OP stated that the HC "went nuts" when the U2 charged his player with a TF for taunting. The "went nuts" description made me think that the HC should have been 'whacked' right then and there for unsportsmanlike conduct. "went nuts" reminds me of Hank Nichols guide line for when to 'whack' a HC (an AC has an even lower guide line) and that is "when he acts like an idiot". Going "nuts" sounds like the HC acted like an "idiot" and should have been 'whacked' and without being there to see the situation unfold I think that the U2 should have been the one to 'whack' the HC.


Comment: Whether this is a high school (VAR and lower) or a college game would have some bearing on how I would handle this situation. No matter what level the game is I normally would not go Opposite after a player TF. APG is correct that before any reporting is done by the U2, the Crew should have met at the Center Circle to discuss the situation (while continuing to observe all of the Players and the Benches). The discussion would allow the Crew to come to a consensus as to how it should handle the situation.

MTD, Sr.

[JRutledge]

This should have been pregamed so that the court would not have been the first place this was discussed. I always pregame how we handle Ts so that I know how officials feel about our switching or how we deal with the coach. I think that a competent official can handle any coach, even if they are in the dog house. I totally see why the U2 might have not liked the actions of the R, but that is why you pregame this so that everyone is on the same page and it looks smoother.

Peace

[deecee]

I personally pregame that I DONT need help or rescue with a coach/player. From the OP I would have T'd the coach because 'nuts' usually means out of line.

A player T I will usually let a coach know if they ask what he did. If a coach is on my "naughty" list I may tell them to ask the player what happened or ignore them. But I try and provide that information.

I would personally be upset if a partner came in on a horse to "protect" me. 1) It makes the official look incompetent 2) It usually compounds the matter because such partners won't call the necessary cheap shot.

As the U1 you should have called the T. If the R asked why you did that your response should be "One of us has to do our job." I hate cheap shots, especially the chicken sh!t coaches that wait until the game is over.

[jTheUmp]

If it's a coach getting whacked, I've always had the calling official call it, report it, and then go opposite.

If it's a player, we generally prefer to stay tableside so we can let the coach know what happened. But if the coach acts the fool and gets whacked also, that's on him/her.

And yes, this is something I include in my pregame, especially with partner(s) I've not worked with before.

[Adam]

My pregame on this is that we will come together after an technical foul to make sure we get it right. In that conference, the calling official will decide if he needs some space from the coach.

And yes, it seems as if we'd be shooting 4 shots in my game. The R was spineless, IMO, and probably afraid of being crossed off by the coach.

[UNIgiantslayers]

When I bring up technical procedures during pregame, most guys around here respond with "let's not have any technicals." It drives me crazy. Maybe I call too many and have too short of a leash and that's why I'm not getting to the state tourney. Regardless, I'd rather not work the state tourney if it means I have to take an unreasonable amount of crap from coaches or players.

[SC Official]

The only thing we pregamed was what we were doing if we whack a coach. We didn't address player T's, so the consensus seems to be that we could have possibly avoided the confusion by doing so.

However, it seems like the majority opinion is that staying tableside after a player T is generally the right thing to do, and that the R didn't need to come in to "rescue" the young guy (who was in his third season). That probably only made it harder for the U2 to gain any respect from the coach. I can see the logic more so if this was a guy in his first varsity game who was obviously very nervous, but this official knew exactly what he was doing and deserved to be on this game (my feeling is if you're working college basketball like this guy then there's no reason you can't do a varsity game). We should have whacked the coach, and the R shouldn't have been so insistent on avoiding the T.

Also, I should have wrote "TCOB" instead of "TKOB" in the thread title.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SC Official

The only thing we pregamed was what we were doing if we whack a coach. We didn't address player T's, so the consensus seems to be that we could have possibly avoided the confusion by doing so.

The reason I pregame this is so that we know that there are times that we might go away from a coach or stay and talk to a coach. Usually a player T needs some level of explanation to a coach that is acting reasonably.

Originally Posted by SC Official

However, it seems like the majority opinion is that staying tableside after a player T is generally the right thing to do, and that the R didn't need to come in to "rescue" the young guy (who was in his third season). That probably only made it harder for the U2 to gain any respect from the coach. I can see the logic more so if this was a guy in his first varsity game who was obviously very nervous, but this official knew exactly what he was doing and deserved to be on this game (my feeling is if you're working college basketball like this guy then there's no reason you can't do a varsity game). We should have whacked the coach, and the R shouldn't have been so insistent on avoiding the T.

And if you pregame this, then you might find out the R's position and you come to either a consensus or just tell that you want the option to talk to a coach. Again, it is not a long drawn out conversation, but at least you have some idea of what personalities you are dealing with in this situations.

I do not like to even go opposite table after a player fouls out. I called the foul, I can deal with the coach. I am grown and can handle myself almost all the time in those situations. I would rather have a coach and I dialog standing close to each other than him yelling across the court. But everyone is not like that.

Peace

[kelvinsmerli]

Screw that, its the official that called it who has the decision of stayin or goin.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

[kelvinsmerli]

I'm with MTDsr.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

[loners4me]

Ive removed myself but if my partner cuts my legs out, we have a problem. You said college ball.....he aint no rookie

[SC Official]

The irony is that in the dressing room, the R said a T is "just another foul." Yet he wanted to treat it like a different foul by forcing the U2 to go away from the coach instead of letting him TCOB himself.