To tea or not to tea....
 

...that is the question.

Had a drink with a friend of mine who officiates after his game on Saturday. Here's the situation.

1st half, GV game. B coach within 2 min stands up to disagree with an out of bounds call, and yells "Are you kidding me????" My buddy was going to whack him, but partner was standing right there and gave him a stern verbal warning. Later in the half, B1 player pushes A1 in the back on a rebound off a free throw. My buddy gets her for a foul and the following exchange occurs on the FT down at the other end where my buddy is T.
Coach: What did she do wrong there?
Buddy: She pushed her in the back on the rebound.
Coach: Are you sure?
Buddy: Girl started on the block and ended up below the basket because of your player. 100%.
Coach: Are you sure she didn't get out-jumped there?
Buddy: Yep. We're done here.
Coach: She's a D1 volleyball recruit. She could out jump her.
Buddy: Well that wasn't a D1 rebound.
Coach: You're awful chippy tonight.
Buddy: Coach, if you want to discuss it, I'm happy to but don't think I'm not going to banter when you're arguing a good call on the other end of the court.
Coach: We'll see when your grade comes out for the game and I send this tape to the state.

At that point my buddy T's him up. To give some background, the coach is always a prick (I've had him many times), always complaining about good calls, and just doesn't know how to ask a question without being condescending. My buddy has whacked him many times and was trying to have a conversation and avoid a T. He was worked up after the game thinking he shouldn't have let it go on for that long, but I told him it was a conversation during a free throw so I have no problem with it. Also, anytime one of our compadres can get a good jab in at this guy, I fully support it.

My question is this: he probably let it go for too long, but do you have any issue having a conversation with the coach knowing that he's a prick and probably doesn't deserve any of your time?

Makes no sense to get into something that is not going to end well.

Did they put the verbal warning in the book? No reason to give a "stern verbal warning" if you're not going to make it official.

Depending on the tone and gestures he used when saying "Are you kidding me?" (yelling across the court, hands in the air, etc.), there's a chance I would've given him his official warning there. Unlikely to whack him if that's his first offense (we're supposed to warn unless the offense is "major").

If he didn't get his warning there, he would have after continuing on following "We're done here."

I could do without the "D1 rebound" comment from your buddy, but that's just because of my personality. To each his own; the coach still has to behave.

Under any circumstance, he's not getting past "You're awful chippy tonight" without a technical foul.

Just Another Day At The Office ...
 

Seems like a normal progression to the technical foul. Oral warning for first outburst. Official later answers questions by coach. Oral stop sign comes out ("We're done here."). Coach keep chatting it up, says some magic words, and gets the technical foul.

The only the thing I might have done differently (in hindsight) would be to make the first oral warning a written warning in the book. That probably would have looked better on the report.

Comment ...
 

Agree. But sometimes when we're pissed off we say things that we shouldn't. Experienced officials should be able to control that, but sometimes stuff slips out. We're only human.

Oral instead of written warning, and the comment? 99% of this technical foul is on the coach. The conversation initiated by the coach was a series of questions that many of us will often respond to, so that had no impact on the technical foul.

Fast As Lightning ...
 

My skin is a little thicker, I would have waited for the grade and tape comment, and then the technical foul would come "fast as lightning", with a possible "finger breaker" signal.

(Still got Carl Douglas's Kung Fu Fighting on my mind).

I watched the tape, and it was NOT, in fact, fast as lighting. He let B1 finish her free throw motion, the shot go in, then he blew it dead.

For the record, it was a great call on the push in the back.

I guess I would have to know the history of the coach. I have had similar exchanges and it ends after the warning. I probably would have also not explained that much if the coach is usually a prick on some level.

Overall I do not have an issue with the coach getting a T. The coach made the situation personal after being given an explanation. At some point, shut up already. You got what you act like you wanted. You do not have to agree.

Peace

Has nothing to do with thin skin. Has everything to do with the fact that he already would have had an official warning if I was on the game (he made a comment immediately after the official telling him "we're done"). And unlike too many officials, when I warn the coach/bench, I am 100% serious that I will follow through.

After "Are you sure" my response is "you asked a question, I gave you an answer" then I'm distancing myself from the a$$-hole.

Any references to grades or contacting a supervisor are an automatic T, no matter what went on previously in the conversation.

Exactly. Funny how the tag of "professionalism" is only supposed to apply to officials, but never the adults who have daily direct supervision over our student-athletes.

Because "it's an emotional game."

Because "it's for the kids."

:p

That probably would have been my almost exact response. I tell coaches that want to argue about a situation they asked me about, "Why did you ask the question? If you did not want to know the answer, then you should not have asked." Then I walk away.

I am not going to act like I am guilty for answering a question that they feel was reasonable at the time.

Peace

Not A Regular Diet ...
 

Back in my coaching days, our athletic director used to tell all his coaches that an occasional slip of the tongue, while not acceptable, but understandable, is part of being human, but as a coach, and teacher, it has to only be an occasional slip of the tongue.

THIS:

THEN THIS ----- >>> WHY???? I thought he said "We're done here.".

I really don't understand this part. If I were the coach, I'd likely think your partner was baiting me for continuing to banter after telling me 'we are done'. Then, of all things, he makes the smartalec comment "well, that wasn't a D1 rebound". (I have to admit it's a witty comeback, though).

I do not think anything the officials said was a slip of the tongue.

Peace

I don't have an issue interacting with coaches like this guy. He got what he deserved in the end. I think his comments would get worse as the night goes on if he was to be ignored and the outcome would be the same; ending with a "T".

Coaches ...
 

Read my post. I was responding to Raymond's post about coaches, I was not referring to officials.

Fastball
 

Here's a situation I faced tonight.
Girls varsity, early second half, I'm the Lead, got a charge call on Home team #22 at the basket. Home bench reacts negatively, assistant coach especially loud. I report the foul, then move to get the ball. (partner bad knees, still on other end of court). The ball had bounced to the home bench and the same assistant had it. I was about 20 feet from him, put out my hands so he could throw the ball to me and he hurled a fastball at me. I made no attempt to catch the ball and T'd him up. He nor the head coach could understand why.
Would any of you had handled it differently?
BTW, this guy is also the Headmaster of the school.

1. I would have switched on the foul, so I would report and keep moving down the court away from the home bench.
2. The officiating partner can obtain the ball and administer the ensuing throw-in.
3. Anyone who throws the ball at me is getting ejected.

For the OP:
That conversation with the coach was way too long and involved. Even during FT attempts officials have players to watch.
Coaches who are pricks don’t deserve any interaction or explanations.
If you say anything at all, keep it to only a few words. Eg I had a good look.
During FT attempts, move 8 feet out onto the floor and ignore the coach.
If the coach behaves inappropriately, issue a warning or technical as necessary.

As soon as the assistant coach gets "loud," the bench is getting at least an official warning from me.

And anyone who "hurls a fastball" at me is getting a flagrant technical foul, but the fact that you gave a regular bench T is fine. Don't be fooled by the attempts of coaches to act oblivious; they know damn well what they're doing.

"Headmaster of the school" means nothing to me. You're on the bench, you get treated like an assistant.

Two man officiating crew on a varsity game?

I feel for ya'.

Are you sure? Yes

Short precise conversations where you can. Having long conversations that end in a T could give a perception that you baited them into it, whether that is true or not. As played out easy T anytime they start talking about what they are going to do in your review or to the state. Assignor/state/association will back you up.

A Clerical Collar Wearing Catholic Priest ...
 

Back in the day, one of our college guys ejected the Saint Anselm College team chaplain. He ejected a clerical collar wearing Catholic priest.

As an additional penalty to the ejection, the team chaplain had to say four Hail Marys and two Our Fathers (rimshot).

(Non-Catholics, check it out on the Google.)

Land Of Steady Habits ...
 

Mike51 must officiate in Connecticut.

Whack ...
 

I once had a high school varsity game where a habit-wearing Catholic nun was the assistant coach.

Remembering the Saint Anselm story, I couldn't wait to bang her.

:eek:

Mother Teresa On The Forum ...
 

A few years ago, when Hollywood producers, and stars, political figures, and sports figures were being called out on their past indiscretions (MeToo), I told my boss that in this modern internet information age anybody could probably dig up "dirt" on just about anybody else if one looked hard enough, and I mentioned that someone could probably even find some "dirt" on Mother Teresa.

He replied, "Yeah, that slut".

Even though I'm a devout Catholic, I almost fell on the floor laughing my ass off.

Couldn't have combined this with your previous post instead of replying to your own post, a reply that is not even basketball related. :(

hahahaha

No Late Additions ...
 

No. I actually did that, but then realized that if anyone had already read my earlier post and then moved down the line, they wouldn't see my edit. I've learned not to make any additions to one's post any more than a few minutes after the original post. The two posts you referred to were two separate thoughts about thirty minutes apart, plenty of time for someone to read and move on. This is especially important if one is involved in a heated debate with lots of Forum members online at the time. Important information (not relevant here) can then be overlooked.

So what relevant information would have been missed in this case? All you're doing is making readers think their is a germane response when there isn't one. It was definitely a "look at me" post.

Who Backs Up On The Forum ...
 

Everything, either relevant, or irrelevant would have been missed by those online in the intervening thirty minutes. In this specific case of attempting a quip, nothing important. But once the first post was read by a member, that member would not see (unless one backed up) my additional unimportant information.

Your off-topic responses far outnumber your relevant posts for the last 2 days. SMH

Lots Of Choices ...
 

While it's nice of you to pay so much attention my posts, enough to actually read them, and count them, but I'm sure that it's been more than two days, probably as far back as my retirement back in mid-September.

I'm grateful that the moderators seem to allow me some latitude, but you may still want to try complaining to them, or became a moderator, or don't bother to read any of my posts, or skim over my posts looking for information that you deem important, or just block me and put yourself out of your misery.

As far as I know, nobody's holding a gun to your head forcing you to read all my posts, or everything in all my posts.

See What I Did There ...
 

If somebody is, just type a bunch of asterisks to let us know.

(I watched The Town (2010) on television last night ("sunny skies")).

Do not have to read your posts to see that you respond to yourself multiple times before we can see the actual responses to the information in the post by people actually having a conversation with other people. It can be pointed out that you clearly like posted multiple times and it is our right to say it is a bit annoying. But it is not going to stop you. You like being annoying.

Peace

Slow Down ...
 

But it may slow me down. I do read everybody's posts. And such posts may not be posted in vain. I do occasionally need a friendly (or not so friendly) reminder to back off a little (or a lot).

It's all about checks and balances. Without checks there wouldn't be balance.

You may think that I'm not paying attention, but I actually am.

In many cases I'm having some fun, but in some cases I actually have new thoughts several minutes after my original thought thus requiring a new post, because members don't usually back up on the Forum, and my new thoughts would go unread by those online in the intervening minutes.

In other cases I may want to intentionally separate two related thoughts into two different posts to make the ideas easier to understand, and thus, easier to respond to (see commuting miles versus business expense miles, two separate, but related, tax issues, thus two different posts):

https://forum.officiating.com/basket...ml#post1027108

With all due respect....
 

Billy, your methodology may be self-defeating. When I see you replying to yourself or your string-of-posts, I often say to myself, "Oh, it's Billy, talking to himself again," and skip them. If others react similarly, your teaching efforts may be wasted, for both "the young 'uns" and us old-timers alike.

And because you often post long sequences when you have new thoughts, maybe you should think things through more thoroughly before posting.

Pulp Fiction On The Forum ...
 

Agree. I post and then I reflect. I should reflect and then post. Saying I agree doesn't mean that I can do it, but at least I agree with you, and can try.

I'm Irish, I love to talk, which in the realm of the Forum means that I love to post.

You should have seen me before I gave up all caffeine and was put on Xanax.

Pulp Fiction (1994), Mia Wallace (Uma Thurman) meets Vincent Vega (John Travolta) and she asks him, “When in conversation, do you listen, or do you just wait to talk?”

Vincent thinks about it and then responds, “I wait to talk, but I’m trying to listen.”

Note: Who doesn't think that Uma Thurman was red hot in this movie?

https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.D...=0&w=457&h=175

Nope, in Mississippi.
Some schools use three officials, but most are just two of us out there.

If he's always a prick, drop the warning on the "Are you kidding me" on the first out of bounds play. Then whack him the next time. Solved. While we always say everyone starts with a clean slate, the truth is that a coach who is famous for being a prick doesn't deserve a long leash.

Prior to the written warning becoming part of the game, I had this EXACT SAME circumstance on an OOB call in the first 30 seconds of the game with a coach who gets whacked at least a dozen times a season. I should've whacked him right then -- he ended up getting one in the second quarter when I was tired of him.

That's my main point. I've mentioned it before; one (a newcomer) may actually miss some good information because they don't want to sift through so many off-topic or irrelevant posts.

It's true:

Actually just read through this thread for the first time a few minutes ago. After seeing that first off-topic post, I skipped over ALL of Billy's posts.

When I get that from a coach, it's almost always the first time I'm working in front of them. I always address it with "Coach, are we really going to start this already?" Especially when it's something that happened right in front of the crew and 40-60 feet from the coach.

Coach Tendencies ...
 

Our interpreter just discussed the "clean slate" issue at our meeting on Sunday. He discouraged us from "keeping one in our pocket".

Truth is, pregame conversations often include topics of team tendencies and coach tendencies.

Had a young official work his first varsity game for a coach known for being tough on officials a few days ago. He was concerned about this going into the game.

We told him what to expect, the coach has high expectations for officials and let's them know when they may have screwed up, but then he immediately deescalates the situation and starts "coaching" again, especially if he's not ignored, even if it's just a gesture or body language (no long conversations needed) that shows him that you've heard him.

I was only there for the first half of the game, but it played out just like we told him, a few coach comments ("She got fouled"), a few acknowledgments of said comments ("No coach, I had a real good look at it"), no outbursts, no warnings, no technical fouls (nothing even close).

I've been working with this coach for almost four decades and I guarantee that if he thought he was being ignored, things could have escalated. I'm not saying that they would escalate to a technical foul, but he could have come close to crossing some lines in the sand that would require some decisions on the part of the crew.

I wish this site had a "LIKE" Button.

Have had this guy many times. It's always a matter of time. When he doesn't get one it's cause the officials let him get away with too much.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

You do what you want, but trying to tell you that people are ignoring your posts, especially when they are long and talking about things that have nothing to do with the OP. You can do what makes you feel good, but I was trying to help.

Peace

Or he gets officials that use "that's just how he is" to justify ignoring the behavior.

Whenever a partner says this to me, my response is "not tonight he won't be."

Checks And Balances ...
 

I know. Thanks. You're one of the "checks" that "balances" me.

Watch my posts today, I'm really going to try to stay on topic, but it will be "one day at a time".

Not counting this response post, I believe that I'm two for two (on topic, high quality, posts) today.

As New York City Mayor Ed Koch used to say, "How'm I doing?".

There's also moderator choices, like whether we delete off-topic posts or whether we give you a timeout. Just saying.

I hope that reminder helps you in your quest to stay more on-topic.

Last night-- coach demonstrating and complaining about a call (when she was up by 32 points). I told her to settle down, we're not going to do that tonight. She told me I was too sensitive. I put an official warning in the book and didn't hear anything else all night. Do you whack her? She also then told my partner I'm too sensitive.

**edit- spelling

I would've told her to look at the scoreboard and her reaction after that would determine my next move.

I have little tolerance for coaches who start acting up when their team is up by an insurmountable margin. A bench warning is certainly fair. I probably wouldn't have whacked her if she shut up but wouldn't really have a problem with a T in that situation. If I was your partner I also would've told her to look at the scoreboard.

Your partner should have whacked her since you had already issued a warning. I had a game last season where I warned a coach in the first half. In the 3rd quarter one of my partner had to engage the coach and was about to issue a warning when he looked at me and realized that HC had already been warned, so he whacked him.

I agree with you but I didn't want to tint any opinion in my favor. If a coach said that about my partner after JUST being warned, I'm whacking them. A much wiser man that myself said you promote what you permit, and I fully believe coaches act like this because they are allowed to by people who won't just TCOB when it's warranted.