Techncial Fouls Handout ?????

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Don't embarrass the coach by being demonstrative.

I'd eliminate this statement. You're taking all the fun out of it.

[JRutledge]

" Explanations, if needed should be done by partner, to avoid the immediate second technical foul. Always explain technical fouls on players to coaches."

I think this should be taken off or modified. For one you should not every "always" explain anything to a coach. If the coach is being belligerent they might not be the best person to explain anything. Also many times coaches do not need an explanation at all. They completely understand what their player is all about and do not want you to explain anything to them. I understand the sentiment of this post, I just do not agree with the wording of this point.

Peace

[BillyMac]

JRutledge: Thanks.

 Explanations, if needed should be done by partner to avoid the immediate second technical foul. If asked politely, explain technical fouls on players to coaches.

[Snake~eyes]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

JRutledge: Thanks.

 Explanations, if needed should be done by partner to avoid the immediate second technical foul. If asked politely, explain technical fouls on players to coaches.

I disagree with this statement also.

If the technical is against the player then why wouldn't the calling official give an explanation? What if my partner calls it but I don't know why, how can I explain? I do not think the calling official going to tell the coach (but only if he asks) is going to cause a follow up technical foul, no different then any other foul you call that a coach wants an explanation about.

If the technical is against the coach, then he shouldn't need an explanation. If he TRULY doesn't know why he got it (and isn't just being an ***), then it's highly unlikely I'm going to know why. I would not communicate with a coach after my partner T's him up, I rerfuse to make my partern look like the bad guy, and me the good guy. The only communication to the coach would be me telling him he has to sit, but other than that I will be standing as far away as possible.

[JRutledge]

Snake,

The technical is on the player, not the coach. I would agree I am not explaining much of anything on a coach T. But a player T with a reasonable coach might get some kind of explanation from me (if I called it) or maybe by me if I did not call it.

Peace

[SMEngmann]

I don't really like the idea of long checklists explaining when to give a T and when not to give a T. A lot of this comes with judgement and experience, but I know when I was coming up, these types of things were confusing.

I think the reason I don't like these lists is because I don't agree with the philosophy that officials should try to prevent technical fouls and try to avoid calling them (usually through warnings and the like). We are not out there to be a nice guy, we are there to run a game, and the nicer we are, often, the more liberties that are taken.

Additionally, officials are different people with different personalities and different attributes, but we all have to maintain control of a game. Our personalities, people skills, physical appearance, age, etc all play into what we have to do to run a game, and what works for one guy might not work for another. I think these checklists play into a one size fits all mentality that doesn't really work.

In my opinion, if you want to help your officials out, instill a general philosophy on when to call technical fouls, similar to what the NBA has done this year, which outlines clearly what conduct warrants a T, and what is acceptable conduct.

[NewNCref]

Originally Posted by SMEngmann

I think the reason I don't like these lists is because I don't agree with the philosophy that officials should try to prevent technical fouls and try to avoid calling them (usually through warnings and the like). We are not out there to be a nice guy, we are there to run a game, and the nicer we are, often, the more liberties that are taken.

Now, there are certainly some cases in which coaches abuse officials who won't T them up when push comes to shove, but I think a certain amount of warning should, in some cases, be given. For example, you get a whiney coach who wants to throw his hands up and give the traveling sign every time he think we missed one. I'm going to warn him, and if he continues, then he gets the T. I don't think it does anyone any good to T him up straight away. If you warn him and he stops, problem solved. He continues, you T him up, then maybe he stops. He doesn't learn, does it again, then T number 2 will have him sitting outside in the parking lot. The warning took 5 seconds, and could have stopped things from getting any more heated than necessary.

Originally Posted by SMEngmann

Additionally, officials are different people with different personalities and different attributes, but we all have to maintain control of a game. Our personalities, people skills, physical appearance, age, etc all play into what we have to do to run a game, and what works for one guy might not work for another. I think these checklists play into a one size fits all mentality that doesn't really work.

It seems like you're under the impression that this is going to go out as a, this is when and only when you should ever give a technical foul and these are the methods for doing it. But something tells me this is going to just be given as a guide to guys on what to think about when giving a T. The guys, no matter how hard any organization tries, are never going to do things EXACTLY like you tell them to. They're going to personalize them. With this, that's okay, with the definition of travel and illegal dribbles that some of my partners have had, it's a bad thing.

Originally Posted by SMEngmann

In my opinion, if you want to help your officials out, instill a general philosophy on when to call technical fouls, similar to what the NBA has done this year, which outlines clearly what conduct warrants a T, and what is acceptable conduct.

It seems to me that that's what this list is trying to do. Give an impression of the things that go into giving a technical foul, and what is and is not unacceptable behavior.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SMEngmann

I don't really like the idea of long checklists explaining when to give a T and when not to give a T. A lot of this comes with judgement and experience, but I know when I was coming up, these types of things were confusing.

I think the reason I don't like these lists is because I don't agree with the philosophy that officials should try to prevent technical fouls and try to avoid calling them (usually through warnings and the like). We are not out there to be a nice guy, we are there to run a game, and the nicer we are, often, the more liberties that are taken.

Additionally, officials are different people with different personalities and different attributes, but we all have to maintain control of a game. Our personalities, people skills, physical appearance, age, etc all play into what we have to do to run a game, and what works for one guy might not work for another. I think these checklists play into a one size fits all mentality that doesn't really work.

In my opinion, if you want to help your officials out, instill a general philosophy on when to call technical fouls, similar to what the NBA has done this year, which outlines clearly what conduct warrants a T, and what is acceptable conduct.

I do not like these lists for some of the very same reasons you stated. I think we are all very different. I know as an official I am very different than when I first started. I used to have these hard and fast rules, now I do not anymore because I want to adapt to the situation I am faced with.

You also stated that officials should not prevent Ts. I feel we should and do whatever we can to warn and let it be known what might cross the line, when given a chance. But that shows how different our experience and who we might be around can affect those basic philosophies.

The bottom line is we are not robots. Personality is always going to play a role in our officiating. It certainly is that way in the NBA.

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by SMEngmann

I think the reason I don't like these lists is because I don't agree with the philosophy that officials should try to prevent technical fouls and try to avoid calling them (usually through warnings and the like). We are not out there to be a nice guy, we are there to run a game, and the nicer we are, often, the more liberties that are taken.

Additionally, officials are different people with different personalities and different attributes, but we all have to maintain control of a game. Our personalities, people skills, physical appearance, age, etc all play into what we have to do to run a game, and what works for one guy might not work for another. I think these checklists play into a one size fits all mentality that doesn't really work.

What he said.

Everybody sets their own tolerances and limits. As long as you are consistent and the players/coaches know what they can and cannot get away with, everything usually works out OK. If you can keep the game under control and keep the unsporting crap out of it also, you're doing your job.