New mechanic

[Pirate]

I had my first varsity contest of the year the other night, and also had the opportunity to use the new federation mechanic of allowing the non-calling official to notify the coach when one of their players has been disqualified due to 5 fouls. Needless to say, it was a bit awkward. We did discuss the possibility of this situation during our pre-game, but it still didn't flow very well, if you know what I mean. Any suggestions on how some of you may have already handled (or will handle) this situation?

Pirate

[Adam]

Half the time, we're set up for free throws when we find out, so it's not a big deal for the non-calling official to go to the coach. It's generally a formality anyway (the coach knows). Tuesday night, we had one, and coach told his sub to wait, and his DQ'd player to stay on the court. This was all after the bench had told us, but we hadn't told the coach yet (officially). I go to the table, verify that this is indeed what is happening. Coach turns his back and talks to his sub, allows me to inform him, and uses about 20 seconds of his 30, talking only to his sub. Worked well that way.

[Larks]

Originally posted by Pirate
I had my first varsity contest of the year the other night, and also had the opportunity to use the new federation mechanic of allowing the non-calling official to notify the coach when one of their players has been disqualified due to 5 fouls. Needless to say, it was a bit awkward. We did discuss the possibility of this situation during our pre-game, but it still didn't flow very well, if you know what I mean. Any suggestions on how some of you may have already handled (or will handle) this situation?

Pirate

I've noticed a lot of the time, the coach is aware of the 5th and has someone ready before you can ask for them so why go thre the practice or having the off official get em.

But I can see this could be helpful in certain situations.

I bet this gets changed back because in practice, it seems too cumbersome.

Larks
VIT

[ChuckElias]

I'm kind of surprised that nobody seems to be embracing the "new" mechanic. "In my area", we've been encouraged for years to let the non-calling official go the coach if it's an "interesting" situation. I had thought that the new mechanic was just a reflection of what everybody was already doing in practice.

[MN 3 Sport Ref]

I agree with Chuck Go to the table and report the foul. The coach usually knows it is the players fifth. If not, the scorer (if you have pregamed them well) will tell you. Then go and tell partner to tell coach. The few extra seconds it takes to do this IMO helps to difuse some of the tension that goes with fouling out a player. Used the mechanic a couple of nights ago and think it worked slick.

[JRutledge]

you can tell the coach. The issue should be to inform the coach of what was called. The main person that knows this, is the calling official. It is very possible that the non-calling official has no clue who and what happen on the foul. To me, this "mechanic" can cause more confusion and can delay the informing of the coach. Because if the other officials are doing their job, they are not going to be aware that a kid fouled out or might not know who it was called on.

I had this happen twice this year and I just told the coach myself, started the 30 second timer and let the non-calling official take care of the substitution. Not much different than if I had called a foul and go opposite table. The last two years when we had the "immediate" substitution experimental rule, we did the very same thing, just had the non-calling official take care of the substitution.

That is the best way to handle it in my opinion and is the way I plan to handle it from here on out. Most officials like this better.

Peace

[Rich]

I'm with Rut on the 5th foul.

The only place where I've seen a "switch" used where I think it makes sense is when an official has to inform the head coach of the seatbelt rule after a technical (esp. a direct technical on the head coach). Then the off official will inform the coach in order to keep the calling official out of there.

Most 5th foul calls are routine. Why paint a small percentage of situations (where it makes sense to switch ) with such a broad brush (making everyone do it the same way, every time)?

Rich

[MN 3 Sport Ref]

Rut, no one said you couldn't talk to the coach after you called the fifth foul. I believe this is part of the purpose for this mechanic. If he wants to "waste" some of his 30 seconds w/ you while your partner handles the sub. so be it.

[mick]

"SITUATION 1: A5 is called for a fifth foul. Who informs the coach? RULING: It is recommended that the non-calling official in a crew of two or the new tableside official (trail or center) in a crew of three be responsible for notification. After informing the player, the official instructs the timer to begin the 30-second replacement period. (2-8-4; 4-14; 10-5-1d)"


If it is inconvenient, don't worry about it. Just report and replace.
mick

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by MN 3 Sport Ref
Rut, no one said you couldn't talk to the coach after you called the fifth foul. I believe this is part of the purpose for this mechanic. If he wants to "waste" some of his 30 seconds w/ you while your partner handles the sub. so be it.

I did not say "this is what was said." I am just refering to the mechanic and the interpretation of how it is to be handled. All I am saying, is forget the mechanic and tell the coach yourself. You called it, be a man and tell them the player fouled out. That is all I am saying. Basically, I do not agree with the logic behind the mechanic.

Peace

[MN 3 Sport Ref]

Originally posted by JRutledge

I did not say "this is what was said." I am just refering to the mechanic and the interpretation of how it is to be handled. All I am saying, is forget the mechanic and tell the coach yourself. You called it, be a man and tell them the player fouled out. That is all I am saying. Basically, I do not agree with the logic behind the mechanic.

Peace

Agreed. I was just saying that it was nice that we now had in writing the option of getting away from the coach in a heated situation. I suspect this is the way many of us have been handling it for many years. But as with any time there is a change we tend to over-disect it and read too much into it. Debate is what makes us better officials however.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by MN 3 Sport Ref


Agreed. I was just saying that it was nice that we now had in writing the option of getting away from the coach in a heated situation. I suspect this is the way many of us have been handling it for many years. But as with any time there is a change we tend to over-disect it and read too much into it. Debate is what makes us better officials however.

Well, I live in an area that does not have slaves to the NF Mechanics. I agree in most things we should follow the NF Mechanics, but does anyone know a single person that calls a PC Foul the way the NF suggests? There are always things the NF suggests, but does not mean we all agree with it. This is just one of those times. And just think it has never been a problem to tell the coach yourself as the "calling official." And most officials I worked with did the same.

No big deal. But opinions were asked about it, and I gave one. Outside of this board, this is probably the biggest discussion I have had on this topic.

Peace