The Official Forum - Head coach late arrival to game

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)

- - Head coach late arrival to game (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/32899-head-coach-late-arrival-game.html)

i would have done it different bay but what you did is fine by the books.

after he responded with "co-coaches" I would mention its his choice if they both stand or alternate who stands and coaches and it will be the opposing captain's choice who will shoot the 2 free throws.

now he knows what the penalty will be and its entirely up to him and his "co-coach" where it goes from there. now if trouble comes, it found you not the other way around. btw I can see where your partner was coming from however he was wrong on the time and place. your T was warranted and that should have been a locker room discussion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

Girls varsity game early this season. Visitors have two coaches -- a man and a woman. Every action tells me he is the head coach and she is the assistant. We do the pregame with the coaches and he attends; as the the players are introduced, he shakes their hands; first time out by V and he calls it A minute later I see both two coaches standing ... one towards the table; the other at the other end of the bench. At the next dead ball, I tell the man that only he can stand. He tells me that they are "co-coaches." I say they can be whatever they want, but for this game he is the head coach and only he can stand.

Next time down the court, I am the lead, and I see she is standing and coaching. I call a T on her -- as the assistant standing. When I get to the table, my partner and the man greet me. The man says that she is the head coach today and she will stand. He said he explained that to me when I talked to him earlier...I said that he had taken every action possible to prove he was the head coach and for this game, he was the head coach. My partner called me aside and asked me to reconsider the T. Now I feel stuck. The rule, case book and point of emphasis all back me. She was not saying a word to me...she was coaching the players. But now I am told that she is the head coach and I can't penalize a head coach for coaching from the coaching box. So I take the T back. The home coach doesn't like it, but he accepts the explanation....the T was for the assistant standing, but since she is not the assistant, she is acting within the rules.

At halftime, my partner gave me the "Don't go looking for trouble" talk. He may have been Old School for all I know. because he said exactly what OS said (if they are not screaming at you, ignore them...no matter where they are standing.) When I had that team a few weeks later, the man made a point of coming up to me during warmups and saying he would be sitting and she would be the head coach for the game ... but he also gave me the, "No one else has said a thing to us all year" line.

That's exactly why the Officials Manual tells you that you should verify before the game exactly who the head coach actually is. It saves any confusion later on in the game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mick

I (and others) may jog by and say
[*]

"...big box tonight."

M&M sez that you're going to Hell too.:D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

That's exactly why the Officials Manual tells you that you should verify before the game exactly who the head coach actually is. It saves any confusion later on in the game.

Verify is not in my manual. But it certainly became SOP for the rest of the season.

Interesting aside....this league has three teams with "co-coaches" but this is the only team that acted this way. The other teams told us -- before we asked -- who was the HC for the game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

A minute later I see both two coaches standing ... one towards the table; the other at the other end of the bench.

Frankly, based on this, I think you're okay sticking with the T.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

Frankly, based on this, I think you're okay sticking with the T.

That was also my thought. You call the T on the female coach, with the explanation that she's the assistant and may not be up to coach. The male coach responds by saying that she's really the head coach, so you shouldn't have called the T on her.

At that point, my response might have been, "You're right. The T is on you."

Quote:

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

Verify is not in my manual. But it certainly became SOP for the rest of the season.

Manual--Pre-game duties of the R- 105(j) on p.17.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

At the next dead ball, I tell the man that only he can stand. He tells me that they are "co-coaches." I say they can be whatever they want, but for this game he is the head coach and only he can stand.

Next time down the court, I am the lead, and I see she is standing and coaching. I call a T on her -- as the assistant standing. When I get to the table, my partner and the man greet me. The man says that she is the head coach today and she will stand. He said he explained that to me when I talked to him earlier...I said that he had taken every action possible to prove he was the head coach and for this game, he was the head coach. My partner called me aside and asked me to reconsider the T. Now I feel stuck. The rule, case book and point of emphasis all back me. She was not saying a word to me...she was coaching the players. But now I am told that she is the head coach and I can't penalize a head coach for coaching from the coaching box. So I take the T back. The home coach doesn't like it, but he accepts the explanation....the T was for the assistant standing, but since she is not the assistant, she is acting within the rules.

At halftime, my partner gave me the "Don't go looking for trouble" talk. He may have been Old School for all I know. because he said exactly what OS said (if they are not screaming at you, ignore them...no matter where they are standing.) When I had that team a few weeks later, the man made a point of coming up to me during warmups and saying he would be sitting and she would be the head coach for the game ... but he also gave me the, "No one else has said a thing to us all year" line.

First of all, when did I say that? You gonna have to prove that. Don't go putting words in my mouth.

I'm going to tell you what I would have done here. Once you issued the warning, then you followed that with the T in direct violation of your warning. It ain't coming back. That's my word, hopefully you will remember me saying that. Then again, if you been dipping into that kool-aid that MTD is passing around, that explains it. Afterwards, you turn around and tell them, you don't care who the HC is, niether one of you can stand now.

Now, you say this to your partner in front of the AC at that meeting. Sorry partner, I gave them a warning. Just keep repeating that everytime they say something, I gave them a warning! Who's shooting!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Old School

I can't tell if this is right or wrong, it's completely incoherent. Oh, well. What others have said has been useful and instructive. One poster worth of gibberish doesn't have to be a big deal, I guess...

Quote:

Originally Posted by deecee

after he responded with "co-coaches" I would mention its his choice if they both stand or alternate who stands and coaches and it will be the opposing captain's choice who will shoot the 2 free throws.

Uh, nope. No alternating. They get to choose, perhaps, but they have to stick with that choice. I'm not having prairie dog coaches.

you misunderstood -- its their choice how they want to act. I cannot make them both not stand or each alternate who stands and therefore. Either way they will be penalized on their actions after they have been explicitly warned.

Ah, I see it now in the post I responded to. Now it makes sense. My work day is done, I need to go home and play with the kids.

Co-Head Coaches are not allowed under NFHS rules. They are not allowed under NCAAM rules. However, they are allowed under NCAAW rules, but any penalty goes to both of them. So if each one gets a T, they both leave.

It's true... It's true...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Manual--Pre-game duties of the R- 105(j) on p.17.

IAABO does not use the NFHS manual. I found an old one, though, and it says "verify with the head coach that team members" are properly equipped and will exhibit good sportsmanship. Not quite the same as verifying the head coach. In my game, the man I thought was the head coach was asked those questions. He verified that his players would do what we asked.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

To clarify, any T charged (directly or indirectly) to either coach is charged against both (it doesn't count twice, however, in reaching the bonus situation). The more proper statement would be that if they combined reach the proper number of technicals, both will be ejected - not that both are ejected after one T on either one.

NCAA 10-10-6:
The head coach or co-head coaches shall be ejected after (a) two
direct technical fouls have been assessed to him, her or them, (b) three
bench direct technical fouls have been charged to his or her team or (c) a
combination of one direct technical foul and two bench technical fouls have
been assessed to him, her or them.

Also, Nevada, I seem to remember seeing somewhere that co-head coaches were only ok in NCAA-W, but I can't find that in the book. Could you point me in the right direction?