Player ignores ref

[Mark Padgett]

There's no need to ask him if he understands or not. If he reaches over again, he didn't understand. If he doesn't, he did.

Let's say you T him for not responding. You go over toward the table and the coach asks, "what did he say?" You respond, "nothing". Rots of ruck with that.

[Hawks Coach]

Why do I say you are looking at it from your perspective? Simple, you never expressed any thought as to why the player may have reacted how he did. I gave some reasons that I thought you may not have considered, and you say they are asinine. I guess you have only one perspective - yours, although you don't seem to want to recognize that fact.

If you said don't break the plane and left it at that, you have no problem. His initial stare may mean any of a number of things, including "#$%^&*, I hate when that happens, "*&^%^$< I hate refs that call that" -- it really doesn't matter. He can think what he wants as long as he bites his tongue and says nothing to you. He is a competitor, he isn't going to like you or your calls all the time. As long as he doesn't vocalize his issue or give visible dissent, why look for trouble?

But you chose to interpret his stare as lack of understanding, then jumped in with a "do you understand" line. His stare now probably means "I wish this *&^*&&ing ref would shut the &*^%&^ up and get on with the game." Free country, and you seem to be asking for him to cop an attitude.

The first comment about the plane is appropriate, the "do you understand" could easily have been taken as demeaning. I don't know, I'm not the person to whom you were attempting to communicate. It sounds that way to me, and I wasn't there. A player of that age knows the rule, stating his offense without following up with "do you understand" would have been sufficient.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

New idea for a bumper sticker:

"Boston, where the cows are prettier than the women."

So untrue, though. Not to mention the fact that Boston proper has no cows.

To paraphrase from Old School: Boston . . . the sunshine state . . . gorrrgeous!

[Rickref]

Hawks Coach let's put this in another perspective. Your in practice explaining to a player how to read screens. He doesn't respond. So you say "Do you understand" are you now demeaning this player. What if he doesn't respond to you after that. What consequence will there be. Are the other players expecting something to happen? Is he questioning your authority as a coach? I think the "do you understand" was probably more of courtesy to make sure he understood, because if he didn't he's about to be T'd up for violating the plane again. He's being disrespectful in both instances. I've already stated that I would pass on a T in this circumstance, but I find it difficult for a coach to defend this behavior. Winning demands an attitude, not this type of attitude however.

[Mark Dexter]

This whole thing reminds me a lot of the old story:

Coach - "Can I get a T for what I'm thinking?"
Ref - "No."
Coach - "Well, I think you're a jackdexter!"




Having called T's in similar situations, I can say that no good comes from it. Indicate the plane, administer the throw-in, move on.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter

So untrue, though. Not to mention the fact that Boston proper has no cows.

OK, OK, I stand corrected:

"Boston, where the cows are almost as pretty as the women."

BTW the cows in Boston part is sorta literary license.

To paraphrase from Old School: Boston . . . the sunshine state . . . gorrrgeous!

By Old School do you mean they would punish a teenager for saying nothing?

[Edited by Dan_ref on Apr 13th, 2004 at 04:16 PM]

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

By Old School do you mean they would punish a teenager for saying nothing?

No - the Old School reference was just to the attractiveness of cows (and women) in (and around) Boston.

[tomegun]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

Get away with what behavior?

Remaining silent?

What I meant was you warn a player and then you warn a player and then you warn a player and then you warn a player and then you warn a player!

Some people will do this over and over. The next game the player will think "the official will not do anything." Of course this isn't all players but some of them. That is al I meant.

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by footlocker
I have been instructed by senior officials and at camps to point out the plane that the defending player should not cross. Particularly I should do so after the infraction as a preventative measure before the next inbounds situation. BTW, I also let a kid know after a made bucket and a time-out that he has the right to run the endline before the next inbounds- am I patronizing him here too or just doing my job.

When I am serious on the court, which is only about half of the time because I am such a smarta$$, I don't say anything to players or coaches that is not absolutely necessary.

I don't believe in many things that veteran officials say to do as preventative officiating.
For your two examples above:
1. I just call blow the whistle and report the warning to the table making sure that I speak loudly enough that the coach can hear me. If the coach wants to warn/instruct his player, he can do that. My view is that is his job.

2. While I always know whether the player can run the end line or not, I only tell them if they ask me. I believe that it is the coach's job to teach their players the rules of the game, not mine. I just make the calls.

I've found that this avoids most of the trouble.
In your original sitch, I wouldn't have even talked to the player, unless he asked me a direct question after the play.

[Hawks Coach]

Originally posted by Rickref
Hawks Coach let's put this in another perspective. Your in practice explaining to a player how to read screens. He doesn't respond. So you say "Do you understand" are you now demeaning this player. What if he doesn't respond to you after that. What consequence will there be. Are the other players expecting something to happen? Is he questioning your authority as a coach? I think the "do you understand" was probably more of courtesy to make sure he understood, because if he didn't he's about to be T'd up for violating the plane again. He's being disrespectful in both instances. I've already stated that I would pass on a T in this circumstance, but I find it difficult for a coach to defend this behavior. Winning demands an attitude, not this type of attitude however.

I coach him - he has to respond to me or I can bench him. My relationship to my player is something different than yours as a ref. And I may speak to different players in different ways, knowing how they react to things. You don't know this nor should you.

Not all players view you as people who are there to help. And you are not there to coach him - you are there to make the call. If it is a 9 year old game, the question you asked has merit - they are just learning the game. For a HS varsity age player, make your calls and move on - you aren't their coach, you aren't there to teach them.

And I am not defending the player, I am explaining what he might have been thinking. Yeah I think he might be copping an attitude, but I am simply saying that refs shouldn't be looking to T a player for having an attitude they don't like when they make a call. You and I agree on this. When I see a player copping an attitude on the court, I yank them. But that is a coaching decision, not a referee's decision. If the palyer is po'd the best thing to do is say nothing rather than say what is on his mind - I tell my players that all the time.

[dblref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

I'm a lumberjack and I'm okay. . .

Isn't there a minimum heigth requirement to be a lumberjack?:

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
[/B]

I don't believe in many things that veteran officials say to do as preventative officiating.
For your two examples above:
1. I just call blow the whistle and report the warning to the table making sure that I speak loudly enough that the coach can hear me. If the coach wants to warn/instruct his player, he can do that. My view is that is his job.

[/B][/QUOTE]Speak loud enough so the coach can hear you? I report the warning to the scorer to be logged, and then I go right to the coach and make sure that that he knows that his team is being warned for delay. That's one of the official's general duties under rule 2-7-10.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by dblref
[/B]

I'm a lumberjack and I'm okay. . . [/B][/QUOTE]

Isn't there a minimum heigth requirement to be a lumberjack?:

[/B][/QUOTE]5'2". Chuck just makes it. In his heels.

I cut down trees, I wear high heels
Suspenders and a bra.
I wish I'd been a girlie
just like my dear Papa."

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

I don't believe in many things that veteran officials say to do as preventative officiating.
For your two examples above:
1. I just call blow the whistle and report the warning to the table making sure that I speak loudly enough that the coach can hear me. If the coach wants to warn/instruct his player, he can do that. My view is that is his job.

[/B]

Speak loud enough so the coach can hear you? I report the warning to the scorer to be logged, and then I go right to the coach and make sure that that he knows that his team is being warned for delay. That's one of the official's general duties under rule 2-7-10. [/B][/QUOTE]

JR,
I know that by the language of the rule I should be informing the coach separately after I report the warning to the scorer, but I don't. I can't really defend why I do it simultaneously, other than it is faster, easier, and I am sure that the coach knows that his team has been warned.
Of course, technically my way is incorrect. Thanks for pointing that out for all forum members who want to do it by the book.
My point, however, was that I say nothing to the player. The book doesn't instruct us to, and it seems that you don't either. That is the coach's job.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
[/B]

I know that by the language of the rule I should be informing the coach separately after I report the warning to the scorer, but I don't. I can't really defend why I do it simultaneously, other than it is faster, easier, and I am sure that the coach knows that his team has been warned.
Of course, technically my way is incorrect. Thanks for pointing that out for all forum members who want to do it by the book.
My point, however, was that I say nothing to the player. The book doesn't instruct us to, and it seems that you don't either. That is the coach's job.

[/B][/QUOTE]I tell the head coach because I do not want to ever hear "Why didn't you tell me that there was a warning issued? If I hadda known, I woulda told my players." I just take nothing for granted. Takes an extra 10 or 15 seconds, at the most.

As for the player, I will say to them something like "That's a warning for not staying in-bounds, # whatever. If you do it again, it's a T". That's "preventive" enough for me, and doesn't take long. If they do have a reasonable question then, I will answer it too.