Excessive time-out granted, but...

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Well, since I explicitly stated I do follow-up, I'm not understanding how it got applied to my post. You're the one who alluded to only "possibly" notifying the head coach ...

I'm not even Jewish.

I actually suggested that it wasn't kosher before Raymond's reply, my followup kosher was related to my original kosher.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

New situation ... Notifying a non-head coach adult, who is on on the fringe of the huddle not speaking, early in the timeout so that the information can be communicated to the entire team, possibly for strategy, before the timeout ends. Of course, by rule, this isn't kosher.

I believe that JRutledge also (along with me) alluded to only "possibly" notifying the head coach.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

#3 if I have time or remember. Likely talking to partners so that might not ultimately happen depending on the conversation with partners.

bob jenkins also alluded to it with the word "or".

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

1 or 3.

Like this the best.

Originally Posted by Raymond

1 AND 3. Not mutually exclusive.

Doesn't involve digging into the huddle. Gives and early notification to an adult (for strategy purposes). Gives the, by rule, notification to the head coach.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

A possible problem here is that it can take a granting lead official and put him back on an endlne (some immediately, some at the warning buzzer) after reporting the timeout (no switching on timeouts). Did the reporting official notify the coach that he used his final allotted timeout, or did he choose not to dig into the huddle? Is a followup confirmation with the head coach after the timeout needed by the non-granting official, now at the division line near the table?

Over the years, almost all my partners that granted a timeout and were informed by the table that final allotted timeout had been taken, have only communicated to me that the team had used it's final allotted timeout, and not that the head coach had, or had not, been notified.

Seems a better mechanic to allow "bumping" from the granting official to a partner closer to the table (if not the same official). This puts all the notification responsibility on one official who can best decide if, and when, to notify the head coach.

Just spitballing here.

I'm not spit-balling. I'm telling you how I ACTUALLY DO things. So all these other what-ifs are absolutely meaningless to me. If my time-out position is going to put me 60' from the coach, then I make sure to communicate to the appropriate partner to make the notification.

It's not rocket science. I don't need to turn the process into a something that needs a dissertation to explain it.

The problem with your original post is that you limited the answers as if there are no other common sense ways to do it.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

When a team has used its last time-out, one of our duties is to notify the head coach. What other duty during a time-out trumps notifying the coach?

Agree.

Officials getting together to discuss their roles in the final seconds of the game, or an official having short chat with the table crew to make sure that everything is copacetic on their end, or officials moving back to original positions, should not trump notifying the head coach.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

If my time-out position is going to put me 60' from the coach, then I make sure to communicate to the appropriate partner to make the notification.

And a great partner you would be.

(Said non-sarcastically.)

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

And a great partner you would be.

(Said non-sarcastically.)

I may not be the greatest referee, but I make a concerted effort to be a great partner, and it's a reputation I pride myself in.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

I may not be the greatest referee, but I make a concerted effort to be a great partner, and it's a reputation I pride myself in.

As do I.

One fifth of our Arbiter anonymous partner rating is teamwork (the ability to work effectively as a team with his fellow official, accepts criticism, shares the responsibility and avoids attempts to shift the blame, etc.).

It's always my highest rating (by far) of the five parameters (appearance and conditioning, mechanics, team work, judgement, and game management) that are peer rated.

I like to think of myself as a good partner, and thank God, my anonymous partner ratings (many with "good partner" comments) back me up.

Now if I could just get rid of my bum ankle and my bum knee ...

[JRutledge]

Again, this is silly. Tell the coach however it works for you. Where I work assistants are usually very informed about these kinds of things. But not stopping a coach in mid-sentence to tell him something his assistant already knew in the first place. This is not that hard Billy. Really, really easy.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Again, this is silly ... however it works for you ...

It's only silly until in the final seconds of a heated game, due to partners confusing notification responsibilities (maybe too busy after getting together to discuss their floor roles in the final seconds, or having a chat with the table crew, or moving back to original positions); or due to a distracted assistant coach not communicating with his head coach properly; followed by a head coach requesting and being granted an excessive timeout that costs him the game, and blaming it on the officials based on his rulebook knowledge of notification responsibilities ("I was never notified"); that it no longer can be considered silly.

Do almost all head coaches already know before "official" notification that they have used all their allotted timeouts? Sure, and it's on a lot of scoreboards.

Can officials be almost certain that assistant coaches, once notified, will be responsible and followup and notify the head coach? Sure.

Does almost mean 100%? No.

How often will a screw-up in notification by an official (not done by the book), or a distracted assistant coach, lead to a disastrous ending to a game? Seldom, if ever, but I don't what to be in that once in a million (maybe a brazilian (old joke)) disastrous game.

Put in simpler terms ...

Originally Posted by Raymond

When a team has used its last time-out, one of our duties is to notify the head coach. What other duty during a time-out trumps notifying the coach?

Really? How difficult is this to achieve? We successfully do way more difficult things dozens of times in a game.

Final seconds of a heated game? Take your time. When the ball is dead we must be alive. Cross all the T's, dot all the I's, and safely get out of Dodge (sorry about the mixed metaphor).

JRutledge absolutely doesn't need this advice, his experience, outstanding reputation and resume speaks for itself, but young'uns making their way up the ladder should heed my advice.

To paraphrase a former president: JRutledge could blow a big call in the middle of Fifth Avenue and he would still be an outstanding official.

How many state finals has JRutledge worked? Several. How many state finals has BillyMac worked? None. State tournament games? Also none. Just an experienced, reliable, competent, skilled, qualified, journeyman official.

Final timeout notification? Work as hard as you can to do it by the book. Whatever it takes. Why not?

Just don't go digging into team huddles. I think that we can all agree on that.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It's only silly

It's only silly about 4 posts after the question; when three of us answered virtually the same way, the thread should have died.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

It's only silly about 4 posts after the question; when three of us answered virtually the same way, the thread should have died.

Short and sweet.

Originally Posted by Raymond

When a team has used its last time-out, one of our duties is to notify the head coach.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Just don't go digging into team huddles.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It's only silly until in the final seconds of a heated game, due to partners confusing notification responsibilities (maybe too busy after getting together to discuss their floor roles in the final seconds, or having a chat with the table crew, or moving back to original positions); or due to a distracted assistant coach not communicating with his head coach properly; followed by a head coach requesting and being granted an excessive timeout that costs him the game, and blaming it on the officials based on his rulebook knowledge of notification responsibilities ("I was never notified"); that it no longer can be considered silly.

Was in a college game last season and the teams were informed at some point. No one said a word about us informing the coach or not informing the coach properly. You know what was the big debate by the coach to the supervisor? That we talked about it too long. And you know why we talked about it too long? It was a 1 point game and there was debate by my partners how many FTs we should take. The player called the timeout and never once did the coach blame us for not giving him the information. BTW, he was at home too.

Oh, same rules and procedures.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Do almost all head coaches already know before "official" notification that they have used all their allotted timeouts? Sure, and it's on a lot of scoreboards.

Don't know and don't worry about that kind of thing. Just saying that in my experience coaches are not unaware of their situation. Or they know how to find out if they are not clear. I am not the scorekeeper.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Can officials be almost certain that assistant coaches, once notified, will be responsible and followup and notify the head coach? Sure.

Another thing I do not worry about. If the assistant coach is unable to tell the staff and the players the situation, then they probably will not be an assistant coach very long.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Does almost mean 100%? No.

Again, don't care. I am not stopping a coach from talking to give him this information. Also if I get a chance afterward it is up to them to use that information.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

How often will a screw-up in notification by an official (not done by the book), or a distracted assistant coach, lead to a disastrous ending to a game? Seldom, if ever, but I don't what to be in that once in a million (maybe a brazilian (old joke)) disastrous game.

Not something I worry about. This took place in a game that I was not officiating when I was going for my first trip to the State Finals. It was at a Super-Sectional level (basically the level before you advance to the State Semifinals) and a team in overtime called a timeout in a one-possession game and basically ended the opportunity for the team that lost to win the game. Not one word about the officials telling the team anything about timeouts.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

JRutledge absolutely doesn't need this advice, his experience, outstanding reputation and resume speaks for itself, but young'uns making their way up the ladder should heed my advice.

To paraphrase a former president: JRutledge could blow a big call in the middle of Fifth Avenue and he would still be an outstanding official.

I was on this very site when it was discussed some years ago about how we should handle these things and there were people like you trying to convince everyone how bad it would be if a team called a timeout they did not have and the officials were not adamant about telling them their situation. And I was not at all a long-time official or someone with the games experience I have now. It was not an issue then and not an issue now.

Let me say this as well. If a coach did complain that they were not told, then my next question to them would be, "Don't you have people keeping the book? Don't you try to argue about score and fouls in the book as well and you do not know the timeout situation?"

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... but young'uns making their way up the ladder should heed my advice.

...

Young'uns who are making their way up the ladder need to heed the advice of those in their locales/regions who have already made it to the rung they aspire to reach.

One thing that is universally agreed upon by those who have achieved great success is that young'uns need fewer voices in their ears, and the voices they do heed need to limit the verbiage and be concise in their messages.

I have said it to you many times in the past, but your over-explanations, wordiness, and plethora of what-ifs serve only to confuse those who are trying to learn.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Young'uns who are making their way up the ladder need to heed the advice of those in their locales/regions who have already made it to the rung they aspire to reach.

Before I joined the Forum, 100% my officiating experiences came from a little corner of Connecticut (born, live, played, taught, coached, officiate, and will probably die here in Connecticut), and I was sure that our local "ways" were great, with some of my local colleagues claiming, the "best".

So what have I learned from the Forum after sixteen years that I didn't realize previously? Lots of stuff.

Most important? When in Rome do as one's Roman trainers, mentors, evaluators, and assigners want one to do.

Also, different isn't always better, or worse, it's just different.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am not stopping a coach from talking to give him this information.

Never said that I would do that, never did it, just gave it as an option because I've observed subvarsity officials, and some varsity partners, digging into the huddle and distracting the head coach, and afterward suggesting to them that they do something otherwise.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Just don't go digging into team huddles. I think that we can all agree on that.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Never said that I would do that, never did it, just gave it as an option because I've observed subvarsity officials, and some varsity partners, digging into the huddle and distracting the head coach, and afterward suggesting to them that they do something otherwise.

And that is why I said if the assistant is right there and I can tell them, then they have been informed as far as I am concerned. If an assistant refuses to come to his or her head coach with that kind of information so the team knows the situation, then they have bigger issues than what rule was specifically followed by your personal standards. This is not football, we do not write them down ourselves. We are often at the mercy of the table people. This is no exception. I use the scoreboard for timeout records as I use the scoreboard for the possession arrow.

Peace