Kim Mulkey at it again
 

https://www.espn.com/video/clip/_/id/33425041

She’s lucky that her air punch didn’t hit the official.

This gives more context
 

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/afDp8rfaHuQ" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

I am actually surprised she was not run. That kind of reaction, she should been run. Tried of women's officials allowing this crap that you never see by any other coach at any other level without getting run. They act like they are scared of her.

Peace

I wonder what happened with the collision in the lane at about the same time the whistle blew for the T. I thought that might be what the video review was for.

That's what I was pondering on a Facebook thread.

I've seen men's and HS officials (and I am one of them) let more misbehavior slide without a second T than what Mulkey demonstrated here.

Also, the play that got her riled up is a foul IMO. The shooter may kick the leg but the defender goes A to B and knocks her to the ground, rendering any leg kick irrelevant. In a 12-point game with 1:36 left I think I'm giving that call to the losing team.

Maybe with the benefit of another camera angle I'd change my opinion, but that's just my thought. And it doesn't in any way justify Mulkey's histrionics.

She seems to have one of these episodes in the postseason every few years. Maybe that's why she wasn't wearing a coat this time.

Many Questions ...
 

Did the official stop a Kentucky fast break to charge the technical foul?

Are the LSU coaches dressed for a basketball game, or for going to a club?

At least they're better dressed than the "track suits" that some of our high school coaches wear.

Look like the same outfits that they probably wear to practice.

Maybe they just want to be prepared to physically demonstrate to their players how to box out and rebound during a timeout or intermission?

Nice to hear the "Chicken Dance".

Well, the coach from the Cavs got run the other week and did a lot less. Just yelled for the most part.

The UConn coach got run for waving his arms at the crowd after the first one.

Calipari got run by Doug Surmonn at South Carolina and all he did was keep coming down to the table at him and was swiftly ejected.

Mulkey followed the official onto the floor after she air punched at the official within 7 or 8 feet of him. He gave a T properly but she did not leave and still was there.

Now I am not saying that others have not gotten away with things, but I have seen this year officials just yell across the court and they did not stay or gestured as Hurley did at UConn.

Obviously, those at HS are different. And I was in a game wherein the playoffs we should have run one of the coaches that followed my partner to the end line, but he gave him one T, and the best person to give the second one was our other partner and he hardly tried to get the coach back. So I agree and understand we all let things go based on the situation, but just surprised this was not an ejection that would have been supported I can only imagine. The only reason it did not appear to happen was the female official clearly said something that stopped Mulkey in her tracks. And if you notice she said nothing after that offiical checked her. She probably was told something that the mask benefited the interaction. I know this past year I was saying things I would have never said because of having a mask on.

Again, just surprised what she did, she was allowed to stay. Maybe they did not want to trouble trouble with the game nearly over.

Peace

Mulkey is the only one that is in a T-shirt. The others are dressed in professional attire that you would see any time before Covid. But now everyone is wearing sweats or sponsored gear that you used to never see in a actual game setting.

Peace

Men's basketball addressed the leg kick issue. I cannot speak directly to the fact that the Women's Supervisor did the same. So again if ruled that way, I have no issues. Going A to B is one thing, but would we the defender have made contact if not for the unnatural kick out. If anything from the philosophy of the Men's side, this would be acceptable to call a PCF. Because if the defender goes down and would not have made contact with the shooter otherwise, that is what they had advocated. But the NCAA Men's spent an entire video on unnatural shooting motions and showed several plays where the shooter caused the contact or should be called if contact is made with the leg or other parts of the body. So are the Women's officials being emphasized the same thing? I have not seen all their Fast Break videos.

Peace

Wrong Way ...
 

Agree.

I've also paid more attention to what I was saying from behind my mask the past two years.

Saying the same thing with a smile can mean something very different from saying it with an angry expression.

Of course, if the coach, or player, can't see your face, what one says could be taken the "wrong" way.

Fashion Police ...
 

I have never been known for having any fashion sense, especially in regard to women's fashion.

Mulkey's "sparkly" top first got my attention, but it was also the "bright" outfit, makeup, and jewelry of her assistant coach.

I know that the days of high school coaches wearing jackets and ties are long gone, and I actually kind of like high school staffs all wearing casual (Dockers) pants, matching casual (Vans) sneakers, and matching school color polo shirts, with embroidered names, mascots, etc., but the "track suits" are way too casual in my opinion, looking like organized crime gangsters at their social club.

Before COVID, many of our young'un officials were showing up for games in sneakers, work boots, T-shirts, and jeans instead of "business causal" as recommended. Our executive committee was just about to tackle this issue when COVID hit.

Last two years, with COVID, we've recommended that officials come dressed in uniform, not being sure if dressing areas were going to be available, or not wanting officials crowded into small dressing areas.

Many of our officials, both young'uns, and veterans, have come to appreciate the convenience of dressing in uniform at home (or at one's day job), even if it means driving home in a sweaty uniform.

There may be no going back to "business casual", and I find myself on the fence in regard to this issue.

No More Excuses ...
 

I really don't have a dog in this fight. 90% of my games are middle school games and middle schools in my area are known not to have private and secure dressing areas with showers, so we always come in uniform, with the blessing of our local board.

I do work a few freshman and junior varsity games, so the "no private and secure dressing areas with showers" excuse won't work for these high school games next year with COVID (hopefully) relegated to an endemic problem. Being the old fashioned, obedient sheep that I am, I will probably and reluctantly go back to "business casual" and packing a bag for these high school games.

Being the old fashioned guy that I am, I wear "business casual" (dress shirt, khaki pants, dress shoes) with a local board logo sweater when observe my friends in state tournament games. Athletic directors and coaches see me with the assigned officials at halftime and post-game, and I don't want them to see me in jeans, T-shirt, sneakers, etc. I'm so old fashioned that it's sometimes sickening. That's why I can't figure out why I would even entertain the idea of going to my high school games in uniform next year? Yet here I am considering it.

Why did we go from discussing a coach receiving a deserved technical foul in a women's college game to discussing officials' standards of attire? Oh well, BillyMac is being BillyMac again.

Lost In The Shuffle ...
 

I'm actually mad at myself because this (below) got lost in the shuffle.

Discussion?

I am not talking about saying something to not be seen as wrong. I mean saying things you would have never said because no one can see your facial expressions or hear you clearly. I would not be surprised if the officials cursed at Mulkey, because it would be harder to "prove."

Honestly, I have not really cared how they took it if it got the point across. I know that they would say things through their mask that would be seen differently if they did not have the mask on, and I said things back. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Peace

I responded to that post. Go ahead put in your two cents.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Clarity ...
 

Noticed a lot of our guys were pointing at the offender's bench while reporting a foul, something that we've been locally recommended not to do because some view it as an irritant. Those that do it have stated that it helps to clearly identity the offending team's color while wearing a mask.

I am a little confused. What about reporting and pointing? Did that happen here?

I might point to the bench if I am saying I gave a technical foul on them. But not if I am calling a regular foul during the game on the floor.

Peace

Can't Find It ...
 

I can't find it on the Forum, maybe on a different site, or maybe I'm not looking hard enough?

Also, like Raymond and bob jenkins, I'm interested in discussing the dead ball collision in the lane.

Mask Consequence ...
 

Just another mask "consequence".

Perhaps I'm just an old fogey who thinks this kind of conduct needs to be removed from all levels, but I'm looking for a reason to run her on that very first action.

NCAA-W Rule 10-15-1,2,3

It doesn't matter that the hand/fist didn't connect. She needs disqualified for fighting.

White defender in the lane attempts to set a screen on black 44, perhaps in an attempt to draw a team control foul. If play was still live, make your judgment regarding block/charge/no call, but I feel like she's still moving toward the opponent at the time of contact. Since the ball is dead due to the TF, this is nothing.

Nothing Unless ...
 

... unless (high school rules) the illegal contact is intentional or flagrant.

In regards to this play, it is neither of those, as Altor is pointing out.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I wasn't really concerned about who the foul was on. I was just wondering if they were reviewing it for the timing of that collision compared to the timing of the technical foul.

But that would only matter if an official blew their whistle for the collision.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I am still confused. What is the consequence of the mask?

Peace

I was also wondering if they were checking whether blue's contact was intentional. Did Blue have time to avoid white and still chose to run into her? Did blue "launch" (probably too strong a word) at white? Both questions raised while first watching the video and, given apparent higher tensions, worth=y of a look. Neither official was watching that area when the contact happened.

She got the T that she deserved. I think the foul that escalated the behavior was missed. I guess I don't follow college basketball enough to say if there is a chronic problem with her behavior.

In high school ball, slighted aggression towards officials concerns me more than this "in your face" behavior (as long as it is addressed). At least the T was given in this case.

I didn't see a foul in the corner. The shooter went up and down without a hitch. It looked as though the defender ran towards the shooter, but the play did not rise to the level of a foul. I'd say something along the lines of "shooter landed on her own".

Unclear Oral Communication ...
 

Unclear communication, both oral communication and body language (facial expression). In my post I was pointing out that some masked officials had, while reporting fouls, resorted to pointing to benches to supplement (and clarify) their oral communication of the color of the offending team, a trick most of us learned over many years officiating at The American School For The Deaf (with a deaf scorekeeper), but frowned upon as an irritant in "hearing" games.

Right or wrong, from the coaches perspective there was a perceived foul. Either way, she got the T she deserved.

Discussion Worthy ...
 

Agree, worthy of a discussion.

In my high school game, if I saw it, I would be unsure of intentional, might depend on what happened in the previous thirty-eight and a half minutes, and of course, we don't have access to a game monitors in high school for such situations. I had to view the video several times to decide that the contact was a split second after the technical foul whistle, and thus during a dead ball, a very split second. Of course the whistle may have trailed the act that caused as technical foul to be charged.

Scoring Play In Progress ???
 

Since nobody else seems to want to discuss it, I will break the ice.

This was not a classic number advantage fast break, more of a "slow break", but the Kentucky player that received the pass left of the lane had a wide open jump shot. Kentucky never seemed to "pull back" to set up their half court offense. Of course, with the score as it was, Kentucky would have just been happy to play "stall ball" to run down the shot clock, certainly not in a hurry to score unless it's a 100% sure thing (uncontested layup).

NFHS 10.5.1 SITUATION F: A1 is driving toward the basket for an apparent goal when the official, while trailing the play advancing in the direction in which the ball is being advanced, is cursed by the head coach or bench personnel of Team B. How should the official handle this situation? RULING: The official shall withhold blowing the whistle until A1 has either made or missed the shot. The official shall then sound the whistle and assess the Team B head coach or bench personnel with a technical foul. If the official judges the act to be flagrant, the offender shall be ejected. If A’s coach or bench personnel was the offender, the whistle shall be sounded immediately when the unsporting act occurs. (10-4-1a)

What I am saying is they called a technical on the bench, which often does not come with a number or you have to clarify who that person is. I will and seen others point to the bench just like we point to the bench on a warning we give because of the actions of someone on the bench. You tend to find these things no one is talking about, so what is why I was confused about what you were addressing. The mask probably has nothing to do with it but making it clear that is who is getting the T.

Peace

Never Done Because Of Having A Mask On ...
 

The post directly above was the one that got me thinking, not realizing it was just about technical fouls. To paraphrase JRutledge words, I know that this past year some of our local officials were doing things (pointing to bench while reporting fouls for color clarity) that they would have never done because of having a mask on.

Everything is not about what you locally do. I am just saying if they T'd the bench it is common to point to the bench when that is happening. You do not likely see that on a foul on the floor with the players. I cannot speak for what folks you know do in the association you belong to. These officials are not likely from there.

Peace

Creative And Brilliant ...
 

... not likely, fully agree, but some of our guys unilaterally decided to use it as a clarifying "work around" while wearing voice obstructing masks, a creative and brilliant "work around" (though not formally "approved") possibly learned while dealing with deaf scorekeepers.

I myself have many times used the "point mechanic" while officiating at The American School For The Deaf. Didn't need it in my "masked" (hearing) middle school games over the past two years, with small middle school crowds, and my loud, projecting, baritone "teacher" voice, but some of my "masked" varsity friends (especially female officials) found the "point mechanic" useful in their often crowded and loud high school varsity games.

https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.2...=0&w=213&h=177

Train Wreck Collision ...
 

So I watched it again, but assumed that there was no technical foul charged, just looked at the "train wreck" collision.

Is this a screen (delaying or preventing an opponent from reaching a desired position), or is this guarding (placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent)? Does it matter? With both screening and guarding a moving opponent (without the ball), time and distance are factors to be considered. In either case, White did not give Blue time and distance. Blocking foul.

Just looking at Blue, she had her head turned to her left (didn't see it coming) just before the collision, so in my opinion, no intentional foul here. A player who is screened outside her visual field may make contact and if running rapidly, the contact may be severe, especially with no time and distance given by the screener.

Can one illegally "blow through" an already illegal screen (or illegal guarding)?

No Time Better Then Now ...
 

My high school opinion, official made the correct call at the correct time. It would have been nice for him to wait another second, or two, but considering the time, the score, and Kentucky's probable strategy (short of an uncontested layup), it was the correct call at the correct time.

Yes sir. You nailed it.

Some Contributions ...
 

... and I agree. However, did you note my on-topic (high school) contributions to this thread regarding the timelines of the technical foul call (my very first comment in the thread, and so far, the only one to discuss it), the possibility of an intentional foul on the collision (replied to and discussed with Raymond and bob jenkins), and the impact of wearing a mask while officiating (only after JRutledge broached the topic)? I didn't think it necessary to expound on the actual technical foul itself because I thought that it was very apparent to all that it was much deserved, thus causing me to branch out to other things that I spotted in the video. On the other hand, I can see how my on-topic contributions could have gotten lost in the shuffle, with my off-topic musings (coach fashion and official fashion) causing some to not read my on-topic comments. It's a chance that I'm willing to take. It appears that some read my off-topic musings, since some respond negativity to them. It also appears that Forum members respond to my on-topic posts (even those hidden in a sea of off-topic posts), because they respond with agreement, disagreement, criticism, clarification, etc.

You're unnecessarily wordy response only proves the point that was being made.

Challenge ...
 

I am not known to back down from a challenge. Everyone here knows that. They also know that I will admit mistakes, and often apologize for such. My posts in this thread were not, in my opinion, mistakes. Others may have a different opinion, which is fine with me, but those differing opinions will not go unchallenged by me.

I will never disagree that many of my posts are "wordy", thus no need for proof, I agree.

No one challenged you. That's just another excuse for you to post a whole bunch of words.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Gauntlet Throw Down ...
 

ilyazhito and Multiple Sports, but both in a friendly manner. Maybe I overreacted? Got up on the wrong side of the bed this morning. I was mistaken. I apologize.

I shouldn't have picked it up.

https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.P...=0&w=240&h=183