Assistant Coach

[johnnyrao]

I think we had this one before so if someone can point me to the earlier discussion I will go an refresh my memory and not waste your time again.

When a coach gets ejected for technical fouls does the assistant coach that takes over get all head coaching priviliges (calling TOs, asking for correctable error or scoring rulings)? Does the new head coach get to stand and use the coaches box since the earlier Ts were called against the former head coach?

Can anyone provide a rule book or case book justification for this? I looked and I can not find one. This is NFHS rules.

Thanks.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by johnnyrao
I think we had this one before so if someone can point me to the earlier discussion I will go an refresh my memory and not waste your time again.

When a coach gets ejected for technical fouls does the assistant coach that takes over get all head coaching priviliges (calling TOs, asking for correctable error or scoring rulings)? Does the new head coach get to stand and use the coaches box since the earlier Ts were called against the former head coach?

Can anyone provide a rule book or case book justification for this? I looked and I can not find one. This is NFHS rules.

Thanks.

johnnyrao:

You really know how to start a knock down drag out arguement. But the assistant coach that replaces the disqualified and ejected head coach has the right to perform all of the duties of the disqualified and ejected head coach except he has lost the use of the coaching box if the StateHSAA has adopted the coaching box rule.

MTD, Sr.

[nine01c]

Looking at the last discussion won't help you any. We just argued and disagreed about the status of the "new" coach.
I'm with Mark on this one.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by BushRef
[/B]

It says NOTHING about the ASSistant having these priveleges after the HEAD coach is ejected.
[/B][/QUOTE]It also says NOTHING about the assistant coach NOT having those privileges. Can you find anything in the rule or case book to support your personal opinion that the privileges are actually lost? Kinda tough to enforce a rule that isn't there, isn't it?

[Ref in PA]

In PA we have been given a specific interpretation that the Assistant (or who ever takes over) will be seated for the rest of the game.

[johnnyrao]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

johnnyrao:

You really know how to start a knock down drag out arguement. But the assistant coach that replaces the disqualified and ejected head coach has the right to perform all of the duties of the disqualified and ejected head coach except he has lost the use of the coaching box if the StateHSAA has adopted the coaching box rule.

MTD, Sr.

Mark,

Thanks. This is what most of us agreed with at our meeting yesterday. However, when it happened last week the refs admitted they let the asst. coach use the coaching box since they were not sure at the time.

[tomegun]

My question to those that disagree MTD is, what if a team has two assistants? Will you let both of them assume the duties of the Head coach? If not, would you ask which one is going to be the coach? What if they say we are both coaches? I would then ask them which one is going to now be the HEAD coach. Someone asked this before but what if the head coach gets sick and has to leave? The assistants still wouldn't be the head coach but they would assume the head coach responsibilities. Would they get to stand? I don't understand what the big deal is about calling timeouts anyway.

[gordon30307]

Originally posted by tomegun
My question to those that disagree MTD is, what if a team has two assistants? Will you let both of them assume the duties of the Head coach? If not, would you ask which one is going to be the coach? What if they say we are both coaches? I would then ask them which one is going to now be the HEAD coach. Someone asked this before but what if the head coach gets sick and has to leave? The assistants still wouldn't be the head coach but they would assume the head coach responsibilities. Would they get to stand? I don't understand what the big deal is about calling timeouts anyway.

Since the role of the assistant is not specifically addressed when the the head coach is ejected Rule 2-3 would apply. Therefore as per above you would pick one assistant to act as head coach. If only one assistant you have the authority to allow the assistant to act as head coach. If you didn't it would serve you right be called to task by your assignor or your association and held up to riducule by your peers. JMHO.

My Daddy told me you can go a long way by just using common sense.

[Damian]

If the head coach gets a T and loses his coaching box or doesn't handle his bench and gets an indirect T, then that is his responsibility. If he then gets ejected, why should the asst coach taking over lose any previledges? He didn't get a T (not yet) nor was responsible for any other action the head coach did.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Damian
If he then gets ejected, why should the asst coach taking over lose any previledges?

Damian the assistant isn't losing any privileges. He never had the coaching box privileges.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Damian the assistant isn't losing any privileges. He never had the coaching box privileges.

Although he didn't state it all that clearly, I think what Damian is saying is that if the assistant coach assumes the head coach role, why should he be denied the privileges normally given to the head coach.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Back In The Saddle

Although he didn't state it all that clearly, I think what Damian is saying is that if the assistant coach assumes the head coach role, why should he be denied the privileges normally given to the head coach.

If Damian is saying that, then the answer is that the assistant coach is assuming the head coach's role at a time in the game when the head coach has already lost the privilege of using the coaches box- which is what Chuck was saying.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I guess it is time to end this debate once and for all. First forget about the coaching box. It really does not come into play in this discussion. What really being discussed is whether or not a team has a "new" head coach when that "original" head coach is disqualified and ejected. The answer is YES. How do I now? Because I have heard the late Dick Schindler talk about this exact situation. When the "starting" head coach is disqualified and ejected an assistant coach becomes the "new" head coach. The "new" head coach keeps any direct technical fouls that he has already received but if the StateHSAA uses the coaching box, he does not get to use it because of the previous technical foul(s) against bench personal.]

MTD, Sr.