Coach at start of game

Redneck Ref · #1 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 05, 2004, 12:50pm

Varsity boys. At start of game assit.coach is acting as head coach because head coach is out of town at a wedding and has not made it back to town. At start of second half head coach has arrived and takes over coaching duties (up off bench, talking to refs, etc...) Is this allowed? If not, and the other coach brings it up, how should it be handled.

Adam · #2 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 05, 2004, 12:55pm

I've not seen "head coach" defined anywhere in the rules, so I can't find a basis for not allowing it. I know some refs will have a problem with it, but I've not going to consider this a hill worth dying on when I can't back it up with rules.

As always, my view is open to change if someone gives me a rule that leads me there.

Adam

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. · #3 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 05, 2004, 01:06pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Red Neck Ref
Varsity boys. At start of game assit.coach is acting as head coach because head coach is out of town at a wedding and has not made it back to town. At start of second half head coach has arrived and takes over coaching duties (up off bench, talking to refs, etc...) Is this allowed? If not, and the other coach brings it up, how should it be handled.

The coach that starts the game as head coach is the head coach for the entire game unless, he/she gets disqualified/ejected, or has to leave the game for someother reason, such as illness (because he/she is sick of the officiating). To allow a change is a recipe for manipulation if there are technical fouls on the bench.

Adam · #4 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 05, 2004, 01:09pm

Based on what rule or case play, Mark?

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. · #5 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 05, 2004, 01:40pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Snaqwells
Based on what rule or case play, Mark?

Are you going to let the team change head coaches every quarter. Remember, the head coach is disqualified if he/she receives two direct technical fouls or a total of three direct and indirect technical fouls. Are you going to let a team change head coaches after the first head coach receives a direct technical foul, so that the new head coach can say I do not have any technical fouls charged to me for bench misconduct because I was not the head coach when the other head coach received his/her techncial foul. There is too much room for manipulation.

There can be only one head coach and that is the one who starts the game, unless the situations that I stated in my first post occur.

Dan_ref · #6 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 05, 2004, 01:55pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Quote:

Originally posted by Snaqwells
Based on what rule or case play, Mark?

Are you going to let the team change head coaches every quarter. Remember, the head coach is disqualified if he/she receives two direct technical fouls or a total of three direct and indirect technical fouls. Are you going to let a team change head coaches after the first head coach receives a direct technical foul, so that the new head coach can say I do not have any technical fouls charged to me for bench misconduct because I was not the head coach when the other head coach received his/her techncial foul. There is too much room for manipulation.

There can be only one head coach and that is the one who starts the game, unless the situations that I stated in my first post occur.

Ya know Mark, I read & reread the original post and not once did I see a "technical foul" mentioned. I did see someone went to a wedding, but no technical fouls...maybe the coach got hit with a flagrant rice throwing T?

oatmealqueen · #7 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 05, 2004, 02:01pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Quote:

Originally posted by Snaqwells
Based on what rule or case play, Mark?

Are you going to let the team change head coaches every quarter. Remember, the head coach is disqualified if he/she receives two direct technical fouls or a total of three direct and indirect technical fouls. Are you going to let a team change head coaches after the first head coach receives a direct technical foul, so that the new head coach can say I do not have any technical fouls charged to me for bench misconduct because I was not the head coach when the other head coach received his/her techncial foul. There is too much room for manipulation.

There can be only one head coach and that is the one who starts the game, unless the situations that I stated in my first post occur.

Still waiting on the rule reference.
The sitch's that you mentioned above are different than the posters sitch. Your's are game misconduct sitch's, and I believe that no one would allow substitute head coaches in those.
I would not feel manipulated if I was aware that a head coach was running late from a wedding and joined his team a little late. But just my humble opinion.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. · #8 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 05, 2004, 02:12pm

The rules and casebook plays state that there is only one head coach. Why would you let a team change head coach's in the middle of a game.

Unless the original head coach becomes disqualified or has to leave the game for illness or someother legitimate reason there is no reason of a team to change head coaches in the middle of the game.

I know what the original post said. There has to be a continuity to team management. While it is unfortunate that the "real" head coach is running late, once the game starts, the "real" head coach is the one that is running the team, and not the coach that gets to the game late.

JRutledge · #9 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 05, 2004, 02:26pm

Rule 2-3 states, "The Referee shall make decisions on any points not specifically covered in the rules."

This is not a situation that is covered in the rulebook or casebook. Unless someone can reference something, this is your best bet.

If it was me I would probably allow it (not that different than another situation we discussed here) if I was discussed before the game. I would ask the other Head Coach to see if he had a problem with it. If he did not, then I would let the coach come back and take his proper role.

At that point you do what you feel is best. It will be an interesting thing to ask your assignor afterwards or rules interpreters for guidance. But at that time, you have to do what you feel is best.

Peace

Adam · #10 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 05, 2004, 02:30pm

Mark,
Assuming we have a coach's box. I don't have a problem switching head coaches in the middle of the game, at any point. Here are three alternatives for dealing with it.

1. Tell the AC right away that he is the assistant, and as such cannot stand during the game. Team has no HC for GM purposes until real HC arrives. I don't like this one.

2. Tell the AC right away that he is the head coach for game management purposes (with all the rights and responsibilities inherent in that), and the real HC will be an AC for gm purposes.

3. Not worry about it, and if there are no T's prior to HC arriving, allow the change. If there is a direct T on the assistant coach (acting HC), that would then transfer as an indirect T on the new HC. If there has been an indirect T on the AC (acting HC), it transfers to the HC when he takes over duties. This would need to be communicated prior to change in personnel.

rainmaker · #11 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 05, 2004, 02:34pm

I've been told around here not to allow this. if the assistant starts the game as the head coach, he's the head coach throughout, and whoever shows up and joins later is now the assistant. I cant give a rules reference, but it's "the cowboy way" around here, so that's how I do it. I'll change my tune when I hear it from Howard.

ChuckElias · #12 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 05, 2004, 02:57pm

It's only my opinion, but it just seems clear to me that there's only one head coach. Just look in the game program. If the head coach is not present, that doesn't make the assistant a head coach. He's just filling in until the head coach arrives. Likewise, if the head coach is ejected, the assistant who takes over does not become the new head coach, with coaching box priveleges. It seems to me that a team's head coach is not just whoever happens to be calling plays at the moment. It's the team's head coach. And there's only one of those.

The coaching box may only be used by the head coach (FED 1-13-2 NOTE; NCAA 10-11-1). And there's only one of those per game.

The only other rule citation I can offer is from the NCAA rulebook. It's AR 15 on page 134 of this year's book. It says basically that if a team has co-coaches, only one of them is allowed to stand. The intent is pretty clearly that only one person (per team) per game gets coaching box privileges.

(The real beauty of this AR is that even tho only one co-coach is allowed to use the coaching box, they both get charged with any indirect T's!!

)

#13 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 05, 2004, 04:44pm

You know what's interesting about this scenario? I asked (back when I was a co-coach for a high school) what to do if a team has co-coaches (since the conference I coached in had at least 2 schools with that situation). The executive director of the state association (now retired) flat out said only the head coach. I asked for a definition. ONLY THE HEAD COACH! He said, while his face turning red from anger. I was like if a team has 2 head coaches (duh, what does co-coach mean????), he said for me to shut up and remember it's the head coach only. So, if I were to ask the question of the current executive director, I'll be the same thing would happen. I don't think the national rules committee has actually taken the time to define a co-coach situation. I think (personally) they don't want to deal with it, because of the ivory tower theory (don't ask me to explain that one!!!).

Bart Tyson · #14 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 05, 2004, 04:59pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Ref Ump Welsch
You know what's interesting about this scenario? I asked (back when I was a co-coach for a high school) what to do if a team has co-coaches (since the conference I coached in had at least 2 schools with that situation). The executive director of the state association (now retired) flat out said only the head coach. I asked for a definition. ONLY THE HEAD COACH! He said, while his face turning red from anger. I was like if a team has 2 head coaches (duh, what does co-coach mean????), he said for me to shut up and remember it's the head coach only. So, if I were to ask the question of the current executive director, I'll be the same thing would happen. I don't think the national rules committee has actually taken the time to define a co-coach situation. I think (personally) they don't want to deal with it, because of the ivory tower theory (don't ask me to explain that one!!!).

I think you would get a different response. That is not a normal reaction. I would like to hear the other side of the story.

Brad · #15 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 05, 2004, 06:03pm

I think that a little common sense would go a long way here...

What if the head coach had a flat tire on the way to the game and showed up 1-2 minutes after the tip-off? Are you going to tell him that he is not allowed to be the head coach for that game?