The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sun Apr 04, 2004, 01:09am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 109
Send a message via AIM to Luv4Asian8 Send a message via Yahoo to Luv4Asian8
Post

Situation: A1 shoots ball off backboard on post just as she's about to run OOB. Shot's up, and A1 runs back on court from OOB to rebound, first person to touch ball. I didn't call anything as lead. Coach B is yelling at me saying that she can't rebound if she went OOB. I defend (sorta) my no-call as on a try, it's up for grabs. Was my no-call correct? How about my reasoning? What would you do? Thanks.
__________________
"Always Remember Your First Game" -Victor M. Susanto
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sun Apr 04, 2004, 02:11am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,644
The correct call is a direct technical foul on the head coach for being inane.

My basic rule is that whenever a coach argues the rules and he is incorrect, he gets a technical foul.
This way one of two things will happen: 1. the coach will learn the rules and we won't have the problem 2. the coach will stop arguing rules that he doesn't know
(Well, maybe 3. the coach won't change and will receive a second T, which still gets rid of the problem.)
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sun Apr 04, 2004, 02:21am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
Quote:
Originally posted by Nevadaref
The correct call is a direct technical foul on the head coach for being inane.

My basic rule is that whenever a coach argues the rules and he is incorrect, he gets a technical foul.
I assume you're joking, or you work with coaches that are a lot different from the types of coaches I work with. COACHES don't know all the rules, and the ones they know, they don't know very intimately. That's why WE get the big bucks, to understand and enforce the rules.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sun Apr 04, 2004, 02:53am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,644
Try it, you might like it.

Quote:
Originally posted by rainmaker
Quote:
Originally posted by Nevadaref
The correct call is a direct technical foul on the head coach for being inane.

My basic rule is that whenever a coach argues the rules and he is incorrect, he gets a technical foul.
I assume you're joking, or you work with coaches that are a lot different from the types of coaches I work with. COACHES don't know all the rules, and the ones they know, they don't know very intimately. That's why WE get the big bucks, to understand and enforce the rules.
No. I'm quite serious. These are varsity coaches I'm talking about and I expect a certain level of competency out of them. I certainly let coaches ask questions and make points, if they do it politely. However, if they insist on bickering, whining, complaining, gesticulating, or arguing about something and I know that they are incorrect, then.... Whack!

I have done this for 2 years now, and have developed a no nonsense rep in this area of which the coaches are well aware.
They know that I know the rules and that I'll explain a unusual situation to them if they want, but that I'm not going to have a debate on the sideline with them.
Try it once, yourself. See if it gets that ranting coach to knock it off, and makes the game better for you and the players because the head knucklehead is quiet. It may work for you, too. You won't know until you try.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Sun Apr 04, 2004, 03:09am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,213
Quote:
Originally posted by Nevadaref
The correct call is a direct technical foul on the head coach for being inane(sic?).

Spelling error? Did you leave the (s) out of inane?
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Sun Apr 04, 2004, 03:14am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
Re: Try it, you might like it.

Quote:
Originally posted by Nevadaref
Quote:
Originally posted by rainmaker
Quote:
Originally posted by Nevadaref
The correct call is a direct technical foul on the head coach for being inane.

My basic rule is that whenever a coach argues the rules and he is incorrect, he gets a technical foul.
I assume you're joking, or you work with coaches that are a lot different from the types of coaches I work with. COACHES don't know all the rules, and the ones they know, they don't know very intimately. That's why WE get the big bucks, to understand and enforce the rules.
No. I'm quite serious. These are varsity coaches I'm talking about and I expect a certain level of competency out of them. I certainly let coaches ask questions and make points, if they do it politely. However, if they insist on bickering, whining, complaining, gesticulating, or arguing about something and I know that they are incorrect, then.... Whack!

I have done this for 2 years now, and have developed a no nonsense rep in this area of which the coaches are well aware.
They know that I know the rules and that I'll explain a unusual situation to them if they want, but that I'm not going to have a debate on the sideline with them.
Try it once, yourself. See if it gets that ranting coach to knock it off, and makes the game better for you and the players because the head knucklehead is quiet. It may work for you, too. You won't know until you try.
Well, I guess I do it about the same, but based on the ranting, rather than the apparent lack of rules knowledge. I didn't hear the ranting part in your previous post.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Sun Apr 04, 2004, 04:23am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,644
for the betterment of JR

Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
Originally posted by Nevadaref
The correct call is a direct technical foul on the head coach for being inane(sic?).

Spelling error? Did you leave the (s) out of inane?
Nope.

from merriam-webster online:
Main Entry: 1 inane
Pronunciation: i-'nAn
Function: adjective
Inflected Form(s): inan·er; -est
Etymology: Latin inanis
1 : EMPTY, INSUBSTANTIAL
2 : lacking significance, meaning, or point : SILLY
synonym see INSIPID
- inane·ly adverb
- inane·ness /-'nAn-n&s/ noun
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Sun Apr 04, 2004, 04:28am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,644
Quote:
Originally posted by rainmaker
Well, I guess I do it about the same, but based on the ranting, rather than the apparent lack of rules knowledge. I didn't hear the ranting part in your previous post.
Yeah, but it's more fun when you tell them later that they were T'd for not knowing the rule.

It is true, though, because if the coach had known the rule, then he wouldn't have been complaining and throwing that tantrum. The bad behavior is a direct result of poor rules knowledge.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Sun Apr 04, 2004, 07:45am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,213
Re: for the betterment of Nevada

Quote:
Originally posted by Nevadaref
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
Originally posted by Nevadaref
The correct call is a direct technical foul on the head coach for being inane(sic?).

Spelling error? Did you leave the (s) out of inane?
Nope.

from merriam-webster online:
Main Entry: 1 inane
Pronunciation: i-'nAn
Function: adjective
Inflected Form(s): inan·er; -est
Etymology: Latin inanis
1 : EMPTY, INSUBSTANTIAL
2 : lacking significance, meaning, or point : SILLY
synonym see INSIPID
- inane·ly adverb
- inane·ness /-'nAn-n&s/ noun

Oh my. Thanks for the help, but I was already well aware of the meaning of "inane". That was a weak attempt at humor on my part. I thought that that would be obvious. I was wrong. Next time I will add a smilie when I make a posts like that. That might help.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Sun Apr 04, 2004, 08:47am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Houghton, U.P., Michigan
Posts: 9,953
I agree

Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Next time I will add a smilie when I make a posts like that. That might help.
An efficacious use of a smiley could have prevented the superego's affectation on the ego's protection of the id.








Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Sun Apr 04, 2004, 09:08am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,213
Re: I agree

Quote:
Originally posted by mick
[/B]
An efficacious use of a smiley could have prevented the superego's affectation on the ego's protection of the id.

[/B][/QUOTE]Id's fine with me, Egor.

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:45pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1