Getting back to the bulletin, this article appeared in the NY Times last week. I don't think it says anything new, but it's interesting in that Hank gave an interview to talk about the situation. The quote from Boeheim either came from, or was repeated in, ESPN's Pardon the Interruption. I saw him talking about just this subject. Anyway, here's the article, FWIW.

March 5, 2005
SPORTS OF THE TIMES
In a Brutal Winter, Referees Are Put on Notice
By WILLIAM C. RHODEN

FEBRUARY was not a great month for referees in men's Division I basketball. Earlier this week, Hank Nichols told them so.
Nichols is the national coordinator of basketball officials for the National Collegiate Athletic Association. After watching about three weeks of rough post play, coaches roaming out of the coaching box and players going over the back to get rebounds, he fired off a bulletin to his referees.

"I kind of got after them and said that they've slipped in what we were supposed to be doing and what they've done all year," Nichols said in a telephone interview on Thursday. "They were going well and now they're not, and we need to step it up these last couple of weeks so we can get back on track."

Nichols said his bulletin was not related to the John Chaney incident, in which Chaney sent in a little-used Temple player to commit hard fouls. But his strongly worded memo addressed an atmosphere of loosely regulated physical play that has crept into the college game and has in fact been forming for the past few seasons.

The college game has become rougher, and the officials aren't doing anything about it. For all of the focus on Chaney - and he deserves every bit of it - there is an overriding problem that must be addressed before the vigilantism he practiced becomes a way of life in the college game.

"The officials today are letting too much go," Jim Boeheim, the coach at Syracuse, said in a telephone interview. Boeheim led Syracuse to the national championship two seasons ago and won his 700th game last week. "I had a pro general manager come to our game and said our game is more physical than the N.B.A.," he said. "That's not right. These are kids."

The Big East used to be the worst conference when it came to unbridled physical play. One season, the league even experimented with the N.B.A. allotment of six fouls a player.

Boeheim said the Big East tried to shed its image of physical play for a while.

"Now we're getting back in it," he said. "I think it's a big mistake. The beauty of basketball is seeing guys play and move and run and not have people holding and grabbing."

Scoring has dipped in Division I men's basketball since 2000-1, when teams averaged 71.4 points a game. The current average is 69.7 points.

The more telling statistic is the decline in the number of fouls called in the past five seasons.

In 2000-1, referees called an average of 19.9 fouls per team per game. The figure has decreased with each successive season: 19.2 in 2001-2; 19.1 in 2002-3; 19.0 in 2003-4. At the midpoint of this season, the figure was 18.6 fouls per team per game.

That's a significant drop: nearly three fouls a game that were called four seasons ago are not being called.

About five years ago, Nichols initiated an effort to take excessive physical play out of the college game, and more fouls were called. But in recent seasons, the trend has gradually moved back to fewer fouls being called.

"I thought that four years ago the game was rough and getting ready to get out of hand," Nichols said. "Almost everybody in basketball was concerned that the game had gotten to a point where the weight room outweighed the skills.

"Until the last week or so, we had pretty much eliminated rough play and a wrestling match every night. We've had some slippage these last couple of weeks in February."

Frankly, I was surprised that the numbers supported Boeheim's belief that the game had become more Neanderthal. Referees like to call fouls; they are law-and-order people who use their whistles to dictate the course of a game and send messages to recalcitrant coaches and players. Why would they let the rough stuff go, particularly when they could have a Chaney thing on their hands?

"I think what happens," Boeheim said, "is that officials say they don't want to determine the outcome of a game by calling a lot of fouls. But if they call the fouls early, players will stop fouling because they want to play.

"The heart of this is that the rules are written and the officials are not calling the fouls because, somehow, they think they're going to determine the outcome of a game. It's something that we've been trying to address for the last two years, but it's not working."

Nichols said that outstanding defense was a major reason for the decline in scoring and fouls.

But there may be a more distressing reason for the lack of calls this time of year: fatigue.

The referees - especially the older ones - are tired, and the N.C.A.A. tournament will begin on March 15. Referees are the nomads of the college sports industry. Instead of being under the N.C.A.A. umbrella, as they should be, officials are independent contractors who can work as often and for as many conferences as their schedules and health permit. By this time of year, many officials have had it.

"It could be the whole syndrome in February that everybody's tired, including the refs and the players and the coaches," Nichols said. "They can be getting tired, which means they're not at the top of their games every night, and they're going to pass on some plays."

Every N.C.A.A. tournament has a story line - an undefeated team or a Cinderella. Given Nichols's memo and the events of the past week and a half, a significant story of this tournament will be the officials. They have to call what they see, and they definitely have to see more.

I don't know about you, but I don't feel like I've had enough fun unless we're in the double bonus, both ways, both halves. But maybe that's just me. I'm a law-and-order kind of guy, after all. :rolleyes:

I agree that the coaches shouldn't be treated differently. We got a memo near the end of the season from our assignor reiterating that if there is no box, either it gets marked or both coaches sit. Some schools may view it as an advantage to keep a visiting coach who walks a lot seated. I don't like it, I think the game should stay between the lines. But I can see the logic in that way of thinking.

But I do agree with the directive that if there's no box marked, they sit. It's not a matter of a rule allowing you to seatbelt the coach. It's the other way around. The priviledge of standing to coach is only afforded coaches in states where the box is approved by the state association and it is clearly marked on the floor. The box is a priviledge, not a right.

I can just see it now: Hold on their coach, that's an excessive amount of attitude. I'm afraid I'm going have to write you up for ..... hey, is that a donut? Jelly filled? Mind if I have one? Mmmmm, I really like these lemon ones, you like 'em? So how's it goin this year, coach? You having a good season? :D

We were told somthing similar. If the box is not marked, then the home coach has to sit and the visiting coach may stand.

Same rule in Ohio. The box can vary from game to game as it is the size of the largest bench between the two teams.

If A has 10 players and coaches on the bench and B has 15, both get 15 (chairs or seats)

I do many JV games and I'm usually having site managers mark the box for our game and the varsity.

We are directed to have game management put down the boxes if they are not marked.

A couple of years ago it so happened that the coach was the AD/game management. I notified him about the boxes and he handed ME a roll of tape.

I immediately walked over and handed the tape to the visting coach and said, "Coach please use this to mark your coach's box for tonight."

It took about 30 seconds before the home coach put down BOTH boxes.;)

If the home team does not do it, the visiting team should be allowed to put down the temporary box. If the home coach then has to sit, it is their own fault.

I like that approach ;)