What would you do?

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

As I said, I wouldn't either. I've never done that. It was just a suggestion.

Well, I guess I'm too stupid to realize it too. Because where I come from, staring someone down is staring.

Obviously, you and I think differently about this, and that's ok. You can't always be right. And besides, it's a pretty interesting conversation. But honestly, what "business" is being taken care of? Nothing's been said, nothing has happened. No gestures were made. I don't see how an official can give a T for literally nothing. JMHO.

I don't know how many times I can say the same thing but let's try again:

IMO "staring down" an official as in this play is disrespectful and unsporting behavior. If the game is at the point where a T will help, the coach is getting his T.

Apparently you and others agree with me that this is unsporting behavior but you don't like the direct approach. Even though YOU wouldn't do it you suggest we put it in our pocket. Juulie says wait long enough & the coach will eventually get completely out of control and we'll T him anyway - of course we don't want to have to throw too many T's or we'll be filing reports. Even though Bob says HE wouldn't do it he suggests we bait him. BTW I do agree with Bob that the first step *must* be to confront the coach in this play and give him a chance to back off but the unsporting behavior occurs when he does not comply. After all, if you tell the coach to go back to his huddle and he says "NO" what happens next? As for whether staring appears in the book or not: please tell me what rule says "These and only these actions are to be considered unsporting".

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
IMO "staring down" an official as in this play is disrespectful and unsporting behavior.

Apparently you and others agree with me that this is unsporting behavior but you don't like the direct approach.

I don't agree. I think it's juvenille and shows poor coaching ability (wasting a TO), but I don't think it's unsportsmanlike. It's nothing. It's a look. And a look isn't T-worthy, in my opinion.

As I said earlier, if you don't like it, then just get him the next time he actually does something. But you can't T somebody who hasn't done anything illegal. And no matter where you come from, looking at someone is not illegal. And like you, I feel I've been saying the same thing over and over, but I don't know how else to make my point. No illegal action = no T.

I do agree with Bob that the first step *must* be to confront the coach in this play and give him a chance to back off

I also said this very early in the thread. I said that if a T is thrown in this situation, I would hope that it would not happen until after my partner had tried to walk him back to his box.

[Dan_ref]

Chuck,

As for whether staring appears in the book or not: please tell me what rule says "These and only these actions are to be considered unsporting".

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
Even though Bob says HE wouldn't do it he suggests we bait him.

I specifically said that I DO NOT recommend this.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

I specifically said that I DO NOT recommend this.

I specifically did NOT say you recommend this.

I said you SUGGEST it.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
As for whether staring appears in the book or not: please tell me what rule says "These and only these actions are to be considered unsporting".

Obviously, it doesn't. However, no matter what is specifically listed, "nothing" is not listed, nor I think is it implied. I can't imagine giving a T to someone who is literally doing nothing, except breathing.

You obviously disagree, and that's ok.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Obviously, it doesn't. However, no matter what is specifically listed, "nothing" is not listed, nor I think is it implied. I can't imagine giving a T to someone who is literally doing nothing, except breathing.

You obviously disagree, and that's ok.

I don't mind that we disagree.

I mind that you presume to take the high road by saying your opinion is supported by the rules, when it clearly is not.

10-3-7

Commit an unsporting foul. This includes but is not limited to, acts such as:

There is no attempt at all to list all possible unsporting acts. IOO, an unsporting act is in the eyes of the beholder. You don't think someing is not unsporting? Fine...but don't use nonexistent rules to defend what is obviously merely your opinion.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
I don't mind that we disagree.

I mind that you presume to take the high road by saying your opinion is supported by the rules, when it clearly is not.

10-3-7

I'm not trying to take the high road, and I hope that you know after camping together that I'd work any game with you in a heartbeat. I'm not trying to disparage your opinion.

Here's my problem, and I guess I haven't been saying it quite right. The rule you quote above says that an unsporting foul includes but is not limited to such acts as: blah, blah, blah.

In the situation that we're discussing, there is literally no "act". The person is simply standing and looking at you. In my mind, you need to do something to get a T. Say something, gesture, throw something, stand where you're not supposed to. In the case of a coach staring, he's not doing anything. And in my mind, therefore, no T is warranted. This is why I've been saying that you can't T somebody for doing nothing. You have to do something to get an unsporting T.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

I'm not trying to take the high road, and I hope that you know after camping together that I'd work any game with you in a heartbeat. I'm not trying to disparage your opinion.

Here's my problem, and I guess I haven't been saying it quite right. The rule you quote above says that an unsporting foul includes but is not limited to such acts as: blah, blah, blah.

In the situation that we're discussing, there is literally no "act". The person is simply standing and looking at you. In my mind, you need to do something to get a T. Say something, gesture, throw something, stand where you're not supposed to. In the case of a coach staring, he's not doing anything. And in my mind, therefore, no T is warranted. This is why I've been saying that you can't T somebody for doing nothing. You have to do something to get an unsporting T.

So what you're telling me is that when the coach engages in the act of staring at you he's actually not engaging in ANY act at all.

I got this right?

[Jurassic Referee]

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Wha happened?

The kids over on the baseball board aren't allowed to come out & play with you anymore?

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
So what you're telling me is that when the coach engages in the act of staring at you he's actually not engaging in ANY act at all.

I got this right?

No, actually. What I'm telling you is that "staring" is not an act. There's no such thing as "the act of staring" that you mention. Staring, if you really want to get down to it, is the absense of action. Staring is NOT moving your eyes, and usually also means not moving anything else either.

NOT moving your eyes is not an action. It's not an act. It is literally doing nothing. I don't think you can give an unsporting T for doing nothing.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

No, actually. What I'm telling you is that "staring" is not an act. There's no such thing as "the act of staring" that you mention. Staring, if you really want to get down to it, is the absense of action. Staring is NOT moving your eyes, and usually also means not moving anything else either.

NOT moving your eyes is not an action. It's not an act. It is literally doing nothing. I don't think you can give an unsporting T for doing nothing.

A mouse being stared at by a cat might disagree.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
A mouse being stared at by a cat might disagree.

I doubt it. The mouse would be very happy to be stared at eternally. It's the pouncing that he would resent.

An official should not resent the staring; s/he should resent the pouncing.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

I doubt it. The mouse would be very happy to be stared at eternally. It's the pouncing that he would resent.

An official should not resent the staring; s/he should resent the pouncing.

In an effort to prevent this from going on for an eternity I'll be leaving.