Engaging Coaches Who Get T’d

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

I try not to make issuing a technical foul an emotional thing. Just enforcing the rule. I don't hold any animosity towards the coach and have no issue with my partner being there as long as the coach is behaving. Basically after the call I'm moving on and would have no problem resuming normal communication with the coach.

That sounds wonderful, but they think you hold emotion penalizing them. They think your actions were personal.

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

I'm going to trust that my partner is not doing something crazy like telling the coach they didn't deserve the T -- maybe if that happens one time I will change my opinion.

That is why many officials do not want to talk to coaches after giving a T. Because even when you say the most specific thing to them about a rule, they will try to suggest you said something else. Again I cannot quote silence and if I say nothing, then nothing can be used later.

Peace

[Paintguru]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am not there to calm down any coach. My job is to enforce the rules and inform them what is next. If they choose to continue then that is on them if further action is taken. In many cases that might mean I will completely ignore them. If they do not know what the rules are or if they cannot comply then they will have to answer to someone higher than them as to why they do not know the rules or could not control their behavior enough to stay in the game.

Peace

To each his own, but I find that to be a very robotic way of officiating. I'm not saying that you are required to calm down a coach, but when an emotional play or call happens and a coach has overstepped their bounds and received a T, a little chat and discussion to listen to their concerns by another member of the crew certainly doesn't hurt things and likely will help down the line.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Paintguru

To each his own, but I find that to be a very robotic way of officiating. I'm not saying that you are required to calm down a coach, but when an emotional play or call happens and a coach has overstepped their bounds and received a T, a little chat and discussion to listen to their concerns by another member of the crew certainly doesn't hurt things and likely will help down the line.

Why is it robotic to not feel responsible to "calm down" a coach? Is the coach not an adult? If a coach cannot know what the results of a technical foul is, then that is not my issue. You are right, to each his own, but I am not trying to calm down an adult about something they know they did. And if they do not know, be an adult and realize that you are on thin ice. Kids can pick up on that kind of situation, so can a coach that is an adult. And chances are they knew long before the T what was coming. I have no concerns to listen to when you have crossed the line with me or your partner. We need to move on.

Peace

I have worked with a couple D1 guys who told me that after a technical foul the only ref talking to the coach should be the one who called it. The other partners should stay away because after he gets a T, the coach has lost the privilege of talking to the crew.

I don't fully subscribe to that idea but it's frustrating when I whack a guy last year for waving off a partner after a foul call behind the partners back and then the same partner goes over and throws me under the bus to the coach. I found out a week or so after the game. Some guys are more concerned with what the coach thinks of them and how the coach will rate them rather than sticking up for their crew. I hope it was worth it to that guy cuz whenever people ask me what I think of him I tell them that story. His decision has given him so much bad publicity.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by AremRed

I have worked with a couple D1 guys who told me that after a technical foul the only ref talking to the coach should be the one who called it. The other partners should stay away because after he gets a T, the coach has lost the privilege of talking to the crew.

I don't fully subscribe to that idea but it's frustrating when I whack a guy last year for waving off a partner after a foul call behind the partners back and then the same partner goes over and throws me under the bus to the coach. I found out a week or so after the game. Some guys are more concerned with what the coach thinks of them and how the coach will rate them rather than sticking up for their crew. I hope it was worth it to that guy cuz whenever people ask me what I think of him I tell them that story. His decision has given him so much bad publicity.

And your story is the reason I do not want to talk to coaches after a T is given. Even if he did not throw you under the bus, the perception is that he might have based on what was said. And now you think the guy said something he should not have said. I just do not get why we want to be in that situation when I have done this long enough to know when coaches lie about the conversation. I do not ever want a partner to think I threw them under the bus or somehow got what the coach was saying. Walk away and live another day. They might be mad, but they cannot say I undermine my partner.

Peace

[SC Official]

I’m with JRut and AremRed on everything. Coaches are liars, and engaging with them gives them an opportunity to do just that, regardless of what is said in the conversation.

Originally Posted by Raymond

Only if you choose for it to be your perception. I've never once paid attention to what my partners say to a coach after I issue a T. Only care that coach gets seatbelted if HS game.

Surprised this is your take given that you’ve trained with NBA officials, where the philosophy is definitely to leave the coach alone.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by Paintguru

To each his own, but I find that to be a very robotic way of officiating. I'm not saying that you are required to calm down a coach, but when an emotional play or call happens and a coach has overstepped their bounds and received a T, a little chat and discussion to listen to their concerns by another member of the crew certainly doesn't hurt things and likely will help down the line.

The coach lost his opportunity to make his concerns known when he got a T, at least for the period immediately following the T. I’m not giving him an opportunity to take a shot at my partner or to talk to me and then lie about what I said.

Someone sent me a Court Club vídeo recently where the NBA referees speaking made very clear that in the NBA, the philosophy and expectation is that you leave the coach alone after he gets whacked and it is not your job to calm him down. Don’t see why this philosophy shouldn’t be the standard at lower levels, too (at most camps I’ve been to I hear some form of this same philosophy).

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by SC Official

I’m with JRut and AremRed on everything. Coaches are liars, and engaging with them gives them an opportunity to do just that, regardless of what is said in the conversation.


Surprised this is your take given that you’ve trained with NBA officials, where the philosophy is definitely to leave the coach alone.

I don't talk to coaches after my partner's give them a tech. But I also don't care or don't even look to see what my partner's are doing when I give a coach a Tech.

I'm good with the philosophy of not talking to coaches. I've even told a coach he lost his chance to talk to me because my partner had T'd him and he continued to be difficult.

But why should it bother me if my partners are talking to a coach after I Tech a coach? It has no effect on me or what I'm going to do for the rest of the game.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[VaTerp]

When working with less experienced partners I will sometimes pre-game that when we stick a coach, everyone should get away from him. If a coach asks to speak with you after we've issued him a direct T, "not right now, Coach."

I'd heard others advise this but didnt really subscribe to it until experiencing several different negative situations resulting from engaging coaches after our partners stick them.

The good cop/bad cop perception can be an issue. For partners and the other coach.

I've also seen 2nd Ts issued rather quickly when engaging a coach that IMO should have been left alone. One time in particular it looked really bad on tape because you have a T issued, then another official having a back and forth during the FTs that escalated and the coach is now tossed. Ultimately the coach's fault but the assigner said the crew should not have been engaging the coach at that time. Give him a second to cool off, then the 2nd T becomes obvious b/c the coach will be yelling at a distance not side by side.

I just don't see any upside to doing this while there is the potential for real negatives. There is no need to calm the coach down. That's what the T is for. If they can't calm themselves down then we can issue a 2nd.

HS coaches also know the seatbelt rule so there is no need to remind them at that moment.

If a coach's behavior has gotten to a point that we've issued a T then he's lost the privilege of not just the coaching box, but also the privilege of engaging the crew within reason.

So while a lot, perhaps even most, officials could handle a convo with a coach whose just been stuck again I just don't see the upside and have seen it go south in multiple ways.