whining from winning coach

refjef40 · #1 (**permalink**) Sat Jan 06, 2001, 11:36am

I had a girls varsity game last night tha was very tough.The game was a forty point blowout but both teams were aggressive and fouling till almost the very end.The coach of the team ahead was the only one who complained about anything!The home team was losing and thier fans didn't say anything.The coach wasn't saying a lot just asking for more foul calls.My question is would any of you "T" him up faster in this scenerio?My partner and I were pretty frustrated with him after the game and thought maybe we should haved gave him a "T".Any comments?

sharkref · #2 (**permalink**) Sat Jan 06, 2001, 11:57am

Usually in a case like a 40 point blow out, the main concern is getting the game over ASAP. Although every official has their breaking point on whining coaches, especially in this scenerio. I might tell both coaches as soon as the game started getting out of hand, that my partner and I are only going to call the obvious, aggressive fouls. Usually the coaches I tell this, agree. Good Luck.

BktBallRef · #3 (**permalink**) Sat Jan 06, 2001, 12:34pm

Anytime you have a coach who won't shut up, just raise the stop sign and say, "Coach, I've heard enough." Don't continue to put up with it, no matter what the score is. Then when he pops off again and you stick him, there's no question that he got what he deserved.

williebfree · #4 (**permalink**) Sat Jan 06, 2001, 01:07pm

SHARK... At the Varsity Level, I agree with the majority of your posting. However, "Opening a can of worms," let me ask if you agree with this at lower levels of play??? I am thinking all the way down to middle school.

"... main concern is getting the game over ASAP."

Who is this benefiting?

My main concern is giving both teams a consistent, fairly-called game. The score should not "influence" or determine your calls. I agree that you need to be aware of the score as to gain a sense of understanding what is influencing players' and coaches' decisions.

"...my partner and I are only going to call the obvious, aggressive fouls."

I would argue that "ignoring" the petty stuff, unless you mean ignoring anything less than decapitation, will actually lengthen the game; especially at the higher levels (Sophomore and up). If you call it "loosely," players are going to play more recklessly and sloppy and MORE clock stoppages will occur.

As always, open for feedback!

JoeD1 · #5 (**permalink**) Sat Jan 06, 2001, 04:30pm

Short answer to the original question, yes.

Anyway, as for changing the way you call a game during a blowout, I think that we probably all do it, at least subconciously. But, I still try very hard not to do this because when you don't call obvious fouls or violations (even though it is a blowout), it makes you look like a poor official. It can often lead to problems such as whining coaches.

I think an easy way to avoid this is to call the entire game to the level of the players. Meaning that if the players are horribly out of control, you're going to have to call more fouls to keep them from killing each other. And whether or not it's the 1st or the 4th quarter, I still don't want dead players sprawled all over the court.

Now if they're higher quality players, you obviously won't have to be as tight with your foul calling. But either way, you need to be consistent throughout the entire game.

Buck Wu · #6 (**permalink**) Sat Jan 06, 2001, 11:54pm

First of all many coaches and fans think that just because their is contact, then there is a foul. I would raise the stop sign, so that every one is the gym can see it and the next time he says anything you can give him a "T"

I would never tell a coach that we are only going to call the obvious foul in this situation. I may discuss it with my partner, but never with a coach. That is something that should stay with your partner. The coaches should be able to figure out how we are going to call within the first few minutes of the game, and then they will adapt accordingly. I think a coach will figure it out if you loosen up on your calls and that's okay. I think you can get yourself in trouble if you say that you are only going to call the obvious foul. It opens up to many possibilities.

glind · #7 (**permalink**) Sun Jan 07, 2001, 12:42am

I feel that you should call the last minute of the game the way you call the first minute. Regardless of the score either a one point game or a 50 point game. I also agree that I think if we are honest with ourselves if we are in a blow out game we have a hard time not letting a little bit more go, but if you really try to stay focused and just stress to yourself be consistant. As far as giving a T to the coach I ask one question if the game was close and he was acting the same way would you give it to him? I just try to ref the game the same way night in and night out. Now I know that at different levels ofcourse you ref different but I like to try to stay as consistant as possible.

Just try not to let a score dictate the way you call the game.

BktBallRef · #8 (**permalink**) Sun Jan 07, 2001, 01:22pm

Quote:

Originally posted by glind
I feel that you should call the last minute of the game the way you call the first minute. Regardless of the score either a one point game or a 50 point game. I just try to ref the game the same way night in and night out. Now I know that at different levels ofcourse you ref different but I like to try to stay as consistant as possible.

Just try not to let a score dictate the way you call the game.

I know that this maybe the "politically correct method of officiating" but I don't buy into. Coaches don't coach the same way, players don't play the same way and officials need to be flexible to that. If you've got a 50 point difference in a girls' or boys' varsity game, right or wrong, everybody in the gym wants it to be over. We're not talking about the Super Bowl here. The team that's behind is probably pathetic. They're going to continue to foul, travel, double dribble, etc. If you call every stinking thing you see, you're just going to add to their further embarassment.

We need to put the "If I see it, I'm going to call it" ego to bed and be realistic. Scenario - You're working the plate in a 20-0 blowout. The pitcher for the losing team couldn't hit the backstop if he tried. Are you going to stick to your normal strike zone? I've yet to meet a good plate umpire who is. This is no different.

[Edited by BktBallRef on Jan 7th, 2001 at 12:36 PM]

Hawks Coach · #9 (**permalink**) Sun Jan 07, 2001, 02:39pm

I think most coaches will not be surprised if the standard changes slightly in a major blowout. My main concern, which I assume is yours as well, is safety. Either coach will rightfully get upset if you allow the game to get out of control by ceasing to whistle fouls. Laying off the handcheck or the questionable travel or palming calls is OK.

Where there is solid, illegal physical contact that causes players to lose the ball, especially if the losing side of a blowout also lost the ball, you risk some retaliation from an already frustrated player that feels like you aren't reffing the game anymore. You are probably better off keeping the game under control. In my experience, you can allow a little more contact in a close game because players have too much on the line to risk a dumb foul.

BktBallRef · #10 (**permalink**) Sun Jan 07, 2001, 04:01pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
I think most coaches will not be surprised if the standard changes slightly in a major blowout. My main concern, which I assume is yours as well, is safety. Either coach will rightfully get upset if you allow the game to get out of control by ceasing to whistle fouls. Laying off the handcheck or the questionable travel or palming calls is OK.

Where there is solid, illegal physical contact that causes players to lose the ball, especially if the losing side of a blowout also lost the ball, you risk some retaliation from an already frustrated player that feels like you aren't reffing the game anymore. You are probably better off keeping the game under control. In my experience, you can allow a little more contact in a close game because players have too much on the line to risk a dumb foul.

I agree with you completely. I don't think anyone who favors a little game management would advocate allowing play go to the point that someone's health would be endangered. I'm also going to call hard fouls, undercut fouls or any other contact that is inappropriate. In fact, I think it should go without saying.

Glad to hear a coach's point of view.

williebfree · #11 (**permalink**) Sun Jan 07, 2001, 09:29pm

BktBallRef & Hawks Coach...

I have a great deal of respect for your comments in here (along with many others)... You stay objective and occasionally inject a little humor.

Your posts put the blowout game philosophy into a good perspective.... I will definitely keep this in mind on the next "blowout" that I will undoubtedly and unfortunately be involved in.

BktBallRef · #12 (**permalink**) Sun Jan 07, 2001, 09:49pm

Quote:

Originally posted by williebfree
I have a great deal of respect for your comments in here (along with many others)... You stay objective and occasionally inject a little humor.

Your posts put the blowout game philosophy into a good perspective.... I will definitely keep this in mind on the next "blowout" that I will undoubtedly and unfortunately be involved in.

Glad to hear that you're open to someone esle's opinion. We don't have to agree but we should all listen.

A game comes to mind that our crew worked about a week before Christmas. The home team was terrible while the visitors are the strongest team in the conference (lost the 4-A State Championship last year at the buzzer!). The halftime score was 36-7.

In the second half, we're basically trying to ignore as many minor violations and minor fouls by the home team as possible, without jeopardizing anyone's safety. In the 4th, the fouls are 8-3, visitors having 8 fouls. Guess what? The home coach still wasn't happy! I was just in awe that he couldn't see some of the things that we were letting his girls get away with. He didn't have a clue what was going on. If we had called it straight up, we probably would have had to run him. I've seen him coach since then and I'm convinced that there are a lot of things that he doesn't have a clue about.

glind · #13 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 08, 2001, 11:18am

I guess that the points you all are making about being flexible about how you call a game are very good and I think that I need to change the way I go about things. It is just that the first sport that I officiated was football and the crew that I got in with all the guys have been reffing for 20 some years and they told me not to let the score influence the way that I call the game. I just carried that over to Basketball but I guess I probably shouldn't have. And maybe their committs were just guide lines to go by as a new official. I will have to ask them when we get together.

Thanks very much I'm sure it will help my games go smoother.

Hawks Coach · #14 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 08, 2001, 11:35am

One other cautionary note - be certain it is without a doubt a blowout. While you may be quicker to become more flexible at lower levels, you don't want to let a high school team back into a game by favoring them. If you loosen the calls, do it both ways (in general), unless you have such a clear disparity that the game is a joke. I watched a tournament game with two excellent teams, where one team was down 19 in the 3rd quarter and came back to win. (They were not helped by the refs favoring them because hey were behind) With a few three point shots by the losing team and some poor foul shooting by the leading team, anything less than 25 is achievable in a half.