The dark side of me (that as a coach) has come out again. Let me know if I was dead wrong here....

I was coaching a 6th grade girls game this past weekend. One of my players was driving for an uncontested layup when an opponent made contact from behind (a push). A common foul was called.

At the intermission, I approched the ref (there was only one) and asked why that play wasn't an intentional foul. He got really angry and told me that I clearly didn't understand the rule. I quoted him the 1999-2000 point of emphasis that describes this exact play as an intentional. He then said "but that call is not in the 'spirit' of the rules 'at this level.'" I explained that the safety of the players was always in the spirit of the rules - especially at this level and that this was a dangerous play. The guy's getting really hot at this point and starts barking "did your player fall?" Whenever I try to respond he cuts me off and says again, "did your player fall" (as if to say that the lack of a fall proves that the play was not dangerous.)

I simply walked back to my bench. As a courtesy, I shook his hand afterward and made some small talk, but I still disagree vehemently.

Oh, here's another question -

At on point he said the the defender was "going for the ball." Now she was on the other side of my player so as to make contact with her back. He gave up on this line of reasoning, but my question is: could a player be construed as legitimately going for the ball if the offensive player is *between* her and the ball?

Ok, so it's mostly sour grapes, but I honestly want to know if you guys think I was out of line.

Thanks!!

Joe

The ref just didn't want to call an intentional. You were not out of line. I hope he did a better job of calling after that knowing that you knew the rules.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tim Roden on 01-24-2000 12:16 PM
The ref just didn't want to call an intentional. You were not out of line. I hope he did a better job of calling after that knowing that you knew the rules.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Fortunately, it didn't come up again. It's the "setting the precedent" for dangerous play that I worry about.

Sounds to me like you handled yourself very well and had a legitimate question. The ref, on the other hand, if he really reacted as you describe, was quite unprofessional, no doubt a bit insecure, and probably a rookie. He had no business getting angry at you for asking such a question. Yes, things can and should be called differently at that level compared to higher levels. But if your girl did indeed get pushed in the back, the players still need to start learning that they can't do that. Getting penalized accordingly, and then EXPLAINING to the girl what happened and how to avoid such a call the next time, will help her avoid doing it again, and promote safety.

As to whether a player could legitimately be considered going for the ball from behind, I would say it IS conceivable, if for example he/she tried to reach around the shooter to strip the ball from the front. Usually a push in the back alone, though, with no attempt to get at the ball, is pretty easy to identify and should be called as such (i.e., "intentional").

He then said "but that call is not in the 'spirit' of the rules 'at this level.'" I explained that the safety of the players was always in the spirit of the rules - especially at this level and that this was a dangerous play. The guy's getting really hot at this point and starts barking ....

Coach, when he started barking he probably knew he was not precisely correct and that would have been a good time to say "Thank you", and leave.

...could a player be construed as legitimately going for the ball if the offensive player is *between* her and the ball?

Also, I'd say slim chance, but some. The other night I had the same call, where the little guy lost the ball, chased the Big guy back and grabbed the big guy's shooting elbow/upper arm from behind (I thought out of frustration and with no chance at the ball). Big guy went to the line for 2+ the ball.

mick

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mick on 01-24-2000 02:33 PM

Coach, when he started barking he probably knew he was not precisely correct and that would have been a good time to say "Thank you", and leave.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mick -

That's a good point. I'd have been better off leaving it alone right there!!

Thanks.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JoeT on 01-24-2000 12:09 PM
The dark side of me (that as a coach) has come out again. Let me know if I was dead wrong here....

I was coaching a 6th grade girls game this past weekend. One of my players was driving for an uncontested layup when an opponent made contact from behind (a push). A common foul was called.

At the intermission, I approched the ref (there was only one) and asked why that play wasn't an intentional foul. He got really angry and told me that I clearly didn't understand the rule. I quoted him the 1999-2000 point of emphasis that describes this exact play as an intentional. He then said "but that call is not in the 'spirit' of the rules 'at this level.'" I explained that the safety of the players was always in the spirit of the rules - especially at this level and that this was a dangerous play. The guy's getting really hot at this point and starts barking "did your player fall?" Whenever I try to respond he cuts me off and says again, "did your player fall" (as if to say that the lack of a fall proves that the play was not dangerous.)

I simply walked back to my bench. As a courtesy, I shook his hand afterward and made some small talk, but I still disagree vehemently.

Oh, here's another question -

At on point he said the the defender was "going for the ball." Now she was on the other side of my player so as to make contact with her back. He gave up on this line of reasoning, but my question is: could a player be construed as legitimately going for the ball if the offensive player is *between* her and the ball?

Ok, so it's mostly sour grapes, but I honestly want to know if you guys think I was out of line.

Thanks!!

Joe<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I personally hate the Intentional foul rule because of the "gray" area surrounding it. If I had my druthers, I would like to just eject unsporsmanlike behavior like pushing a kid going for a layup or not going for the ball when trying to get a foul to stop the clock.

It saddens me to see an official respond in this manner when asked for clarification on a call. Your question was not out of line whatsoever and it sounds as if you asked your question is a respectful way. His response WAS out of line. Your persistence, judging from the offical's response, was an excercise in futility. That was unfortunate. I guess you know for the future that this guy gets bent out of shape when anyone questions his calls. Lesson learned.

Joe T,

First off you did what any good coach would have done and asked the question. His responce was poor (why was he calling by himself, is he a member of your referee assocition?) i don't like to call any level by myself and perhaps this was the real reason for the resistance to your inquiry. Your responce that the safety of the players is paramount in your games set the tone of the conversation and the referee missed that correct call as well.

Best of luck

------------------
Don

Coach, 6th grade girls...c'mon! You can't call an intentional in that game. When you officiate 6th grade girls, you have to (i hate using this word) "altar" the rules a bit. If you called every single walk or three seconds you'd be there all day! You have to let a bit more go. It can't be called word for word.
Secondly, you mentioned there was only one referee. Well, one ref can't see a lot. You can't expect that game to be the best officiated game you've ever seen. It's not his fault the other guy didn't show up. But he will still do his best.
Thirdly, I come back to my 6th grade girls point! That is a learning experience. I think you need to spend a little more time coaching ball than trying to coach officials.
By the way, how'd that game end up?
Good luck with the rest of your season! Peace.
S. Hoover

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Alaska Ref on 01-24-2000 09:24 PM
Joe T,

(why was he calling by himself, is he a member of your referee assocition?)

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don -

Most of our games in this particular league are called by one ref. I think they have trouble finding guys. I don't think the assignments are handled by any particular association, either. (I won't ref in this league since my team plays in it.) Another coach friend of mine no longer plays in the league largely because of the one ref thing.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by S. Hoover

I think you need to spend a little more time coaching ball than trying to coach officials.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ironically, that is my usual approach, and maybe you're right that I should stick to it more. My concern was that a precedent was being set to allow dangerous play. Since there was no further incident, it would be fair to suggest that that concern was unfounded.

I agree though that a coach's job is to coach his team. I've found that the more years I coach, the less I worry about the officiating. Thanks for the thoughts and the advice!

Joe

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Geneva">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by S. Hoover on 01-24-2000 10:09 PM
Coach, 6th grade girls...c'mon! You can't call an intentional in that game. When you officiate 6th grade girls, you have to (i hate using this word) "altar" the rules a bit. If you called every single walk or three seconds you'd be there all day! You have to let a bit more go. It can't be called word for word.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

True, you can't call everything at this level. But still, a push in the back is certainly much less frequent than all the travels, three seconds, etc. and perhaps should not be ignored. I would use it as a learning experience--assess the intentional foul if that's what it was, then EXPLAIN the situation briefly to the girl. How you make the call and deal with the player--i.e., your demeanor with her--is important. Don't need to look mad or stern. Just be pleasant and explain what happened and why you called the intentional foul, adding that you know she wasn't trying to hurt the opponent. It's all about learning at this level, and making an "intentional" call can contribute to that process without detracting from the game or upsetting the girl who got the foul.

Kids at that level are not physically in control of their bodies. However, the ref was wrong in the manner he addressed you! I hope someone spoke to the kid about the incident. Glad to hear you kept your cool!