Pre-game warm-ups question - Full Court Warm-Up

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by deecee

Coach my name is _____ and this is my partner ______. good luck if you have any questions now is the best time to ask them. by the way coach we will need your help as we have been told that bench decorum is being addressed more this year than in years past and if you could please keep all movement in your coaches box. (if one isnt drawn out just request that he keeps his movement to about 4 chairs -- usually the first 4 on the bench). And that he can be the only one standing and addressing us.

If I say anything, I just remind the coach about the emphasis on the coaches' box so "if you're going to yell at us, please do it from the box". That usually gets a smile. Of course, I don't use that on everyone, you have to know your audience.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by deecee

JR this is how I look at things and I get blasted here -- many POE's are guidelines for those that cannot handle simple situations. Most games are filled with simple situations its the tough situations that define a good official (judgement helps too).

game management to me is not how do I apply the rules as strictly as I can -- but rather how can I work with both coaches and the table in the confines of the rules where the game can be enjoyable and fair. One of my pet pevees -- because the coaching box and the fashion guidelines were huge POE's in our association this year -- is that the refs I work with only focus on THAT --

me: partner lets go meet the coaches
Partner: ok
Parnter: coach just want to mention that your have a 6 foot box and we don't want you out of it. Also make sure your players report to the table with uniforms tucked in, etc. blah blah blah.

Right there we have already lost our ability to work with the coach.

if it were me

Coach my name is _____ and this is my partner ______. good luck if you have any questions now is the best time to ask them. by the way coach we will need your help as we have been told that bench decorum is being addressed more this year than in years past and if you could please keep all movement in your coaches box. (if one isnt drawn out just request that he keeps his movement to about 4 chairs -- usually the first 4 on the bench). And that he can be the only one standing and addressing us.

simple little meeting and now the coach feels as though we WANT to work with him. You and I can say the samething but get completly different responses -- I make it seem like what the coach will be doing is voluntary by asking him nicely you on the other hand will be ordering him and right off the bat we will have a confrontational game.

How can you work "in the confines of the rules"when you advocate ignoring the rules?

I look at it sometimes as more of a case of an official not having the balls to follow a POE and instead wanting to be Mr. Nice Guy to everybody, and thus is looking for any reason at all to use anything as an excuse for not enforcing the rules properly.

I's say that we have a big difference in philosophy.

[OHBBREF]

Larks - just another Richard Cranium opinion-
While there is nothing that specifically says you can not use the full court - I would think it is implied by the rule stating you should warm-up at the basket furthurest from your bench - it doesn't say you can use the other basket too.

The POE keeping teams seperate would be sufficient in my book to prevent the full court warm up - I would not penalize any one for doing it I would just stop it as soon as it started.

It used to be maybe 20 years ago that if you circled the court during a warm up it was a technical foul.

All in All I would not let it happen it just begs for a problem to occur.
With that said Hank will come back and tell me I am completely threaded in my opinion.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by deecee

JR this is how I look at things and I get blasted here -- many POE's are guidelines for those that cannot handle simple situations.

game management to me is not how do I apply the rules as strictly as I can -- but rather how can I work with both coaches and the table in the confines of the rules where the game can be enjoyable and fair. One of my pet pevees -- because the coaching box and the fashion guidelines were huge POE's in our association this year -- is that the refs I work with only focus on THAT --

You make it sound like an either/or thing. Why isn't game management both (1) applying the rules AND, (b) working with coaches and table? In my association, I have to do things the way my assignor wants them done. The POE's are not just guidelines for those that cannot handle simple situations. In my association, if I don't take the POE's seriously (at least the ones that my assignor cares about), I don't get good games. I also have to work with coaches and the talbe to be sure that the game is enjoyable and fair. I have to do both. That's what the good refs around here do. They work strictly within the rules, and they manage the game to keep it enjoyable and fair. It may be different in your area, but don't make it sound like everyone should do it your way, or else they're just idiots. Some of us are smart enough to know which side of the bread has the butter on it.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The purpose was not to worry about what a team does when the other completely leaves the floor. Even in my state they gave the opportunity for home team to go to center court and do some kind of pre-game ritual. If we enforce the rules the way you suggest, it should be an automatic T for anytime a player goes to the other team’s huddle during introductions to shake the hands of the head coach and officials which is extremely common in these parts

Jeff, you're exaggerating. The situation we're talking about here is one particular thing, and has nothing to do with a player shaking hands with the coach during introductions. There's nothing anywhere in the rule book about that situation.

I'm just saying that for Jeffpea to say "use common sense" isn't a very helpful comment. My common sense tells me that I couldn't care less about shirts tucked in. But it's a rule I strictly enforce, because my assignor tells me to, and that's how it's done in my area. I don't like it, but it's in the book and it's important to my schedule. Common sense just doesn't come into it, at all. It may be that some folks can afford to be a little flexible about certain rules in their area. Fine. But those folks can't just shake off my legalistic concerns by saying "use common sense." It's just not useful.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Jeff, you're exaggerating. The situation we're talking about here is one particular thing, and has nothing to do with a player shaking hands with the coach during introductions. There's nothing anywhere in the rule book about that situation.

The rule is to prevent teams from crossing the division line before the game. I can think of a couple of situations where I would never get all worked up because that took place (e.g.: ball getting away, team running to the locker room)

Originally Posted by rainmaker

I'm just saying that for Jeffpea to say "use common sense" isn't a very helpful comment. My common sense tells me that I couldn't care less about shirts tucked in. But it's a rule I strictly enforce, because my assignor tells me to, and that's how it's done in my area. I don't like it, but it's in the book and it's important to my schedule. Common sense just doesn't come into it, at all. It may be that some folks can afford to be a little flexible about certain rules in their area. Fine. But those folks can't just shake off my legalistic concerns by saying "use common sense." It's just not useful.

Maybe the comment is not helpful to you, but I think his comments were right on. Either you can decide to penalize every infraction no matter how technical it is. Or you can use a little bit of common sense and realize that the rules were not created to prevent what we were talking about. Remember there is not a team on the floor. Why would you make an issue out of this when one team is not at all around? This is a great way to get on everyone's good side before the game. Now you will be expected to enforce every other minor infraction that a coach can think they see. Do you call a dunk before the game that fits the literal definition or do you quietly tell the player to knock it off? There is a lot of flexibility with this rule and no one has shown where it was against the rules for a team to practice on both ends with no team available.

Peace

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Either you can decide to penalize every infraction no matter how technical it is. Or you can use a little bit of common sense and realize that the rules were not created to prevent what we were talking about.

Again with the either/or.

There are lots, and lots, and lots of other possibilities. Please credit me with a little intelligence. Nothing is ever either this or that and those are the only choices.

I'm not saying everything has to be "penalized...no matter how technical it is." I'm saying that a person needs to include in their judgment, not only how the situation feels at a certain moment, but also the larger context of the association, and their general way of handling things, and the state variations and so on and so forth. Around here this particular rule is enforced a certain way. I need to take that into account when I decide what to enforce and what not to.

I'm saying my personal "common sense" isn't the only factor that should weigh into a situation, and in fact that it sometimes shouldn't weigh in at all. That's not to say that there's anything wrong with my common sense, just that it's not always the best "guideline" for how to handle a certain situation.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Again with the either/or.

There are lots, and lots, and lots of other possibilities. Please credit me with a little intelligence. Nothing is ever either this or that and those are the only choices.

I'm not saying everything has to be "penalized...no matter how technical it is." I'm saying that a person needs to include in their judgment, not only how the situation feels at a certain moment, but also the larger context of the association, and their general way of handling things, and the state variations and so on and so forth. Around here this particular rule is enforced a certain way. I need to take that into account when I decide what to enforce and what not to.

I'm saying my personal "common sense" isn't the only factor that should weigh into a situation, and in fact that it sometimes shouldn't weigh in at all. That's not to say that there's anything wrong with my common sense, just that it's not always the best "guideline" for how to handle a certain situation.

Unless there is a specific directive from an assignor or evaluator, I am not going to enforce the rule based on what we have been talking about. I think that is being overly officious and not using very good common sense. I think common sense has to be used because it is clear to me that was not the purpose of the rule. Now that is my opinion and I am sticking to it.

Peace

[jeffpea]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

I'm just saying that for Jeffpea to say "use common sense" isn't a very helpful comment. My common sense tells me that I couldn't care less about shirts tucked in. But it's a rule I strictly enforce, because my assignor tells me to, and that's how it's done in my area. I don't like it, but it's in the book and it's important to my schedule. Common sense just doesn't come into it, at all. It may be that some folks can afford to be a little flexible about certain rules in their area. Fine. But those folks can't just shake off my legalistic concerns by saying "use common sense." It's just not useful.

Rainmaker -- I have two children - 7 & 4; while I do not have a hard and fast rule that says - "you cannot wear hats in the house", I generally would prefer that they don't wear them inside. When my 4yr old insists that he wants to wear his winter ski hat to bed, I choose NOT to incite or create a big problem by forcing him to take it off (and possibly imposing some sort of punishment); instead I simply let him wear it....you know why?....because after 5 minutes he'll get hot and take it off - no harm, no foul.

When the opposing team decides to use the entire court during the pre-game warm-up period, I choose not to worry about it because I know that when the opponent returns to the floor, everything will return to normal (Team A on their side and Team B on their end). I have NO IDEA if there is a rule prohibiting the use of the full court, but even if there was - I would use common sense (or judgement) and avoid punishing one team for something that has no effect on the outcome of the game.....BEFORE you start taking this to the extreme - of course I follow the rules and officiate the game the way the rules require.

You want a specific example of common sense not being utilized that created a problem in a game? Visiting team's coach calls an early TO (after being down 12-2 to start the game). Neither my partner, who heard the request, nor me or our third partner saw a specific "full" or "30 second" signal. After the calling official asked 3 or 4 times which TO they wanted (and getting no repsonse), he awarded a full TO - which is probably what most people would do and probably what most assignors would want. The visiting team were all standing on the court around their coach (typicall of a :30 TO) and ready to play after approx. :30. When the visiting coach found out that he was charged w/ a full TO and not the :30 TO that he wanted, he went nuts and ultimately ended up w/ a T. So instead of using common sense and waiting a few extra seconds to see whether the players were seated on the bench (as during a full TO) or huddled around the coach on the court (as during a :30 TO), my partner gave a full TO which ultimately led the T....and their was 17:33 left in the first half!

Now you tell me, was it better to follow the "rule book" or use common sense? Seems pretty clear to me that the use of common sense would have avoided the train wreck that ensued and would have provided for a better overall game.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by jeffpea

You want a specific example of common sense not being utilized that created a problem in a game? Visiting team's coach calls an early TO (after being down 12-2 to start the game). Neither my partner, who heard the request, nor me or our third partner saw a specific "full" or "30 second" signal. After the calling official asked 3 or 4 times which TO they wanted (and getting no repsonse), he awarded a full TO - which is probably what most people would do and probably what most assignors would want. The visiting team were all standing on the court around their coach (typicall of a :30 TO) and ready to play after approx. :30. When the visiting coach found out that he was charged w/ a full TO and not the :30 TO that he wanted, he went nuts and ultimately ended up w/ a T. So instead of using common sense and waiting a few extra seconds to see whether the players were seated on the bench (as during a full TO) or huddled around the coach on the court (as during a :30 TO), my partner gave a full TO which ultimately led the T....and their was 17:33 left in the first half!

Now you tell me, was it better to follow the "rule book" or use common sense? Seems pretty clear to me that the use of common sense would have avoided the train wreck that ensued and would have provided for a better overall game.

You lost me with that one. If I ask 3 or 4 times if the coach wants a full or 30 second timeout and I get no response, I give them a full timeout. You've got to be kidding if you think I'm going to stand there and watch whether kids are standing or sitting so I can "avoid a train wreck" I already tried to avoid by cordially asking 2 or 3 times more than I should have had to in the first place. Some teams stand for a full timeout as well. I don't see your example as common sense at all. I see it as nonsense.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jeffpea

You want a specific example of common sense not being utilized that created a problem in a game? Visiting team's coach calls an early TO (after being down 12-2 to start the game). Neither my partner, who heard the request, nor me or our third partner saw a specific "full" or "30 second" signal. After the calling official asked 3 or 4 times which TO they wanted (and getting no repsonse), he awarded a full TO - which is probably what most people would do and probably what most assignors would want. The visiting team were all standing on the court around their coach (typicall of a :30 TO) and ready to play after approx. :30. When the visiting coach found out that he was charged w/ a full TO and not the :30 TO that he wanted, he went nuts and ultimately ended up w/ a T. So instead of using common sense and waiting a few extra seconds to see whether the players were seated on the bench (as during a full TO) or huddled around the coach on the court (as during a :30 TO), my partner gave a full TO which ultimately led the T....and their was 17:33 left in the first half!

Now you tell me, was it better to follow the "rule book" or use common sense? Seems pretty clear to me that the use of common sense would have avoided the train wreck that ensued and would have provided for a better overall game.

You ask THREE or FOUR times, and the goof just ignores you? Of course, you're going to charge him with a full time-out.

There's a big difference between common sense and not having the testicular fortitude to enforce the rules. What you're advocating sureasheck isn't "common sense" imo.

Ask THREE or FOUR freaking times and still get no answer? How long were you prepared to wait before you decided to tell the bench what kind of TO it was? The players don't have to sit on the bench during a 60-second TO, you know.

Lah me......

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I just remind the coach about the emphasis on the coaches' box

What is this "coaches' box" that you speak of? I think it's a mythical being -- like Dan_ref's hair or Jurrassic's sense of humor.

(I think I've read that somewhere before. . .)

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

What is this "coaches' box" that you speak of? I think it's a mythical being -- like Dan_ref's hair or Jurrassic's sense of humor.

(I think I've read that somewhere before. . .)

What is this "Jurrassic that you speak of? I think it's a mythical being, like Chuck Elias.

[jeffpea]

I'm willing to wait the 10 extra seconds that it may take to determine whether the coach wants a full or :30 TO before I signal the timer to start the "timeout clock". Why cause problems when you don't need to? You know he wants the timeout, just slow down and figure out which one....this isn't rocket science. What does it cost me to wait - 10 seconds? If a guy deserves a T then give it to 'em, but this is a simple game management problem that can easily fixed by using common sense.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by jeffpea

I'm willing to wait the 10 extra seconds that it may take to determine whether the coach wants a full or :30 TO before I signal the timer to start the "timeout clock". Why cause problems when you don't need to? You know he wants the timeout, just slow down and figure out which one....this isn't rocket science. What does it cost me to wait - 10 seconds? If a guy deserves a T then give it to 'em, but this is a simple game management problem that can easily fixed by using common sense.

I'm not waiting an extra 10 seconds. I ask only twice, if no response then it's a Full. I pre-game this with my partners. Don't forget, there is another team in the game and they are always waiting anxiously to know what type of time-out it is so they can go about their business.