You can't be serious
 

Working my youth league over the weekend (I've been with this league 19 season...was on their board of directors for about 6 years...good league, good board and for the most part, coaches "get it")...

They have a code of conduct form that coaches, players and parents must sign....now that and a paperclip will get you a nice paper airplane but...at least they are trying...

So newer coach in the league got a warning after some comments about calls during the 4th quarter...

One of his comments while I was in front of his bench at T position was "This is how the Saint's lost", talking to his assistant coach but I knew what he was referring to......and then on the very next play at his end of the floor L had a no call in the lane and he says, "You can't be serious!!!???"

Given what the league wants...and the comment was loud enough to be heard by more than just me in front of the bench....I hit the whistle and issued a warning to him and he proceeds to say again, "But you can't be serious, ref?" pretty loudly and passionately..., so I T'd him up.

As I turned to report...He says "I guess he was serious" and he just sat down.... :p

No more complaints.

WHACK!

My God, there it is. Just whack him already!

At least he didn't call you Shirley! :p

MTD, Sr.

That would have been the easiest ejection for me.

Peace

He'd be out of my game too. Reference to the Saints game would be a "knock it off" + official warning in the scorebook. "You can't be serious!" = T. "You can't be serious!" #2 = T #2 + ejection. If he persists, the game is over by forfeit.

Only if the league-specific rules allow it.

Don't leagues default to NFHS rules on those issues? If a coach is ejected, yet refuses to leave, the game cannot continue while he is still present within the visual confines of the playing area. Either that coach is forcibly removed from the facility, he leaves on his own, or an assistant takes over, but I am not allowing a game to continue with an ejected coach present. For me forfeit is a nuclear option, but one that will be used if the situation warrants it.

I'm going straight to a technical in any game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Agreed. The implication to me would be that I'm cheating or trying to affect the outcome. That's an automatic for me.

Only In Connecticut ...
 

At our Sunday local board meeting we spent some time discussing the ejection of a team's only coach (i.e., no assistants), usually in a middle school game, or a freshman game. As a result of some state-wide problems, our state high school sports governing body now has some guidelines in place.

Only coach is ejected. This ejected coach now has fifteen minutes to replace himself with a non-student over the age of eighteen. It is not the officials responsibility to ask for any certification proof, we don't even ask. No replacement after fifteen minutes leads a forfeit by the team without a coach, even if they are leading in the game.

15 minutes? That, IMHO, is insane. The other team has to sit around for 15 minutes because the coach is a %#$%. Just like the time for a fouled out player, giving them 15 minutes to do this means that some of those knuckleheads will take the full 15 just because they can.

IMHO, there should either be an assistant coach on the books at the start of the game or not. If not, too bad. That's the school's fault, not the refs'. Game over.

I'm curious as to why you arrive at the conclusion that the coach is implying the officials are cheating or trying to affect the outcome. I don't think the officials in the Saints/Rams game were cheating or trying to affect the outcome of the game, nor have I seen any serious attempts to suggest they were. The only thing close was the story about 4 of those officials living in Southern California, and even the article I read was more focused on the perception issue.

That said, my conclusion is that he's implying that calls are being missed (most would agree that is what happened in the Saints/Rams game) and/or he feels the officiating is poor. In either case, I don't immediately put this in the "automatic" category. Tone and body language are missing from the OP (and hard to convey via this medium anyway), so there is a chance this requires a T, but I'd actually lean toward a warning for the initial comment and follow that with the T when he loudly says, "You can't be serious". Based on the OP, I think the coach was trying to be humorous more than anything and think the OP handled the situation well.

Appreciate all the feedback.

The league is well run and while there have been some real "gems" as coaches over the years, a lot of the guys volunteering their time to coach are guys that have come up through the lower level leagues into the middle school and HS leagues that they ask me to work each year. I guess there's a reason for that...

I am the longest tenured official in the league (and former board member) and fully understand what they want from their coaches. With that, I probably hand out more Ts than anyone else because of that and I am backed fully by the board, the individual league commissioners and the league president on my on court decisions. In all my years working and being not only an official but an extension of the board, they've never NOT backed a T or and ejection (there's been a few coaches, players and fans tossed)..

The comment about the Saints wasn't something directly said to me, as I was hearing the conversation with his other coach. Now I believe I know full well what he was referring too but I wasn't about to go fishing and again, it wasn't something that was overly demonstrative or heard by anyone outside the bench area and me as I was at T. Once he got loud , I gave the warning. He persisted so he got wacked.

I just found his comments after the T to be rather funny and I'll see him again this week and it will all be good. If not, we'll deal with any behavior accordingly. If the league feels the coach is out of line, they'll remove him from coaching. I don't see this guy being THAT dude.

I will go straight to a T if a situation warrants, but I generally avoid "automatics" because they ignore context.

One remark that always bothers me is "call it both ways," as if I'm intentionally favoring one team over the other. It might elicit a "question my competence, not my integrity" kind of reply, an official warning or a T, depending on the circumstances.

Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference ...
 

Not my call. Guidelines are from the CIAC, the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference, our state high school sports governing body.

99.9% of the time this will only be utilized in middle school games and freshman games.

so cal lurker: What are the written guidelines in your state/conference/league/association, etc. (I'm assuming California)?

Forum members: What are the written guidelines in your state/conference/league/association, etc.?