It is always really hard to explain things through this forum because we cannot see what people are trying to describe. I understand that and this is why I have tried to clarify my position by only referring to someone just standing next to each other. I also said that I do not see how someone can just stand that close to someone without some type of contact in the process. I would think realistically that someone would push or hold to either maintain or to move someone away from that person. I am also not talking about gesturing that makes it seem like they are going to hit or contact the person in some kind of way. But if all we are talking about is someone standing next to someone, then I stand by what I have said about how this call does not pass the smell test.

Peace

Were you in his face on his way to the water fountain? Were you in his face as he walked to his bench for a TO? Were you in his face during intentional or technical foul free throws. Not just next to him, but in his face like in the OP.

People are arguing apples and oranges here.

I cannot speak for the majority, but I do not recall that I have ever said that you should call a T on a player that is guarding an official. Secondly, officials do not have guarding rules that govern our movement. But I would think if a player was just standing next to me I would not give a T as a result. I know I stand next to players all the time so I can quietly say things to them so I can prevent things. Should my partner's then T me up for approaching a player and violating their “personal space” as was indicated here?

Peace

If a play was about to happen, yes.

For those in support of this, do you call every unsporting act?

Thanks for clarifying that. I think you're right that it's not likely to happen without some contact, or some other type of think that makes it taunting. Not likely.

But Rev seems to be saying that IS what he saw, and however unlikely it may seem to be, it may have happened as he's describing. Sounds like a very judgment call. He said that it served to get things tense and people were upset by the behavior, and that he'd have done something about it. Sounds reasonable to me.

And besides, this is a lot more interesting than yet another crossword puzzle in the book a friend gave me to keep me occupied.

Right, but the OP said it was happening even when a play wasn't about to happen. That's the question. See?

The best way I can describe the posture that A1 took is to have you imagine someone standing in front of you as close as possible without actually touching you. He is staring directly in your eyes right in your face. Every time you move he moves to get right in your face again. Not beside you, not behind you, not in front of you facing away, but in your face staring at you eye-to-eye.

This is the posture that A1 took and it occurred during free throws and foul reporting, and even when coach B called B1 to the sideline to talk during a free throw on the defensive end when team B was shooting. It also occurred while B1 was on defense.

I wish I were exaggerating. You'll see that my description has been consistent from the OP.

This is obviously the part of the play that is under question. The entire question is about when play is not imminent, such as during the reporting of fouls or a player off the lane during the first of a 2-shot free throw...

I am not going to convince you and you are not going to convince me. It is just not going to happen right now. If you feel this warrants a T, then call a T. There is not much I can say to tell you otherwise. But just keep in mind that if you do call that, you might have similar reaction to that call in real life as you are getting now. And I am not the person you have to ultimately have to answer to. If your assignor thinks that is a terrible ruling, they will make some decisions that you might not ultimately like.

And yes the level and the stage this would be called at would make a huge difference. I just got through working a semi-final football game and the first call I made was scrutinized much more than any single call I can think of this season. There were also a couple of non-calls that I was involved in that also brought some scrutiny. In this game we did not have a hold call all game; the first hold call of the game made by my Referee had the coach come unglued after a call that I am sure was a decent one. So the level you make this call can mean everything and more scrutiny based on what game you are calling on. You will have different reactions if the people that are watching see you working a post season game (rivalry, TV game, specific conference game, just fill in the blank) as compared to JH game or Freshman B game. That is just the way it is even if you think it does not matter.

Peace

Fair enough, but that's not how I read the OP. When the kid is on his way to the water fountain, play isn't about to happen. When we're shooting IF or TF free throws, play isn't about to happen. When the kid is 94 feet away during the first of two free throws, play isn't about to happen.
You ignore unsporting acts?
Or, you judge borderline acts based on the context, to determine whether they are "unsporting?"

Do not take what Tommy said out of context. He did use the term "ignore." He said that do you penalize every unsporting act (no matter the severity). In other words, do you ever warn or just simply give a T every time something fits the "unsporting" portion of the rules. I would suggest that officials here do not call a T every time something "unsporting" takes place.

I can give you a great example of that. I almost never see an official call a T just because a coach complains about a call. Complaining about a call can be like Rule 10-4-1b: "Attempting to influence an official's decision." Every time a coach says something about the foul count or talks to you about consistency, they are violating that rule explicitly. I do not see many Ts for those actions unless they get to a point they have been doing it all game long. And I know many officials claim they ignore coaches when they start complaining.

Peace

My point was exactly what Rut said. If you penalize all unsporting acts to include this situation then fine. However, if you don't give a T for every unsporting act, but want to make a big deal out of this I would question that. I see this in my local meetings all the time. Officials want to make a big deal out of the most specific rule - something that will probably never happen - but they can't officiate once they have to put their words into action.
I'm just the type person, and official, that doesn't have a lot of time to talk about things I would never do. Excuse me if I'm wrong about anyone - this is a general statement. For someone to discuss something for an extended period of time and then not do it is dumb to me. That is just a waste of my time and a reason why my high school pregames are often short. BSing people just isn't my thing and I feel like this situation wouldn't become this big of an issue.
I would like someone to respond to Rut about a complaining coach. Would you penalize a complaining coach just like you would penalize a player for getting/staying in another player's face and not doing anything - the situation we are talking about.


Can someone stop TO? :D

Good example, Jeff. But yet, when a coach has his player "guard" the official, that goes above and beyond the tolerance level of most officials.

For the most part, I'm in the "don't go looking for stuff" camp. But if you've got a player literally nose to nose with another player when it's obvious to everyone in the gym that the intent is not to play basketball defense as much as to play psychological offense, I don't think we can ignore it.

I'm all for starting with an admonition/warning. Tell them to stop, because it's intimidating and it's not basketball.

Now, if he's just following him around, not getting nose-to-nose, I doubt I'd do anything. Maybe it's the nose-to-nose stare down aspect of it that's getting me. That's the part that strikes me as patently unsporting. Nose to nose when play is neither in progress nor imminent.

Absolutely unreal.
Good thing the Colts won or their kicker's woes might have topped TO's day in the news cycle. ;)

I read too much into your previous question. That's what I get for trying to watch the Cowboys game at the same time.

My point is that is a stretch to assume that is an intimidation tactic.

I would not ignore it because it is a competitive match-up. That does not mean I would call a T.

The problem I have with that statement is that is a big assumption.

Peace

Look, I'm not saying I'd definitely call this. I'm just saying I don't want to preclude the possibility. I'd have to be actually officiating the game to be sure.

From the earliest ages of their players, when coaches teach man-to-man defense, they repeat various versions of the order: "Stay with your man!" "Stick with your man!" "Wherever he goes, you go with him!" "If he goes to the concession stand, you go with him!" (I think that last one was an exaggeration) Players routinely take their defensive position while the ball is dead, whether it be a place in a zone, or finding one's man. (Match up! Match up!) If the nose-to-nose posture is employed in a legal manner by a team during the game in an attempt to handle one or more players, I would find it difficult to deny them the right to maintain this position during a dead ball, regardless of the length of the pause.

Anticipating an extreme question, no I would not find it acceptable for a player to follow his opponent into the huddle during a time out.

Originally Posted by just another ref
I cannot think of an example of anything one player does being against the rules because another player does not like it.



But the like/dislike is not the key. It is the reaction based on the dislike.

What I said was based on the post which asked "What would you say to B1 if he commented to you that he didn't like it?"

Nor would I call a 'T.' As I stated many times, I would back the player up a step and get him out of the opponent's face. I can't imagine any coach having a problem with that.

My question is why not two steps? Why not 2.25 feet? Before giving the inbounder the ball do you say, "OK, you can start to play defense now?" How long does a player have to be in another players "personal space" before it becomes an issue and you step in to make the player move? What if the offensive player is part of an offensive play that requires him to move towards the defensive player? Do you tell him he can't since you moved the defensive player out of his personal space?

I understand what you are getting at, but everything that goes on in a basketball game isn't for us to like. We are there to apply the rules. If you think a player is breaking a rule, apply the penalty. I think I might have more problems with all the adjustments that would have to be made.

Please tell me that you don't really believe that. :eek:

5-12-5 . . . The 60-second time-out conference with team members shall be conducted within the confines of the bench area. Players shall remain standing within the confines of the bench area during a 30-second time-out. (1-13-3)

It's not acceptable because there's a specific rule prohibiting it. See my above post.

Now can we go back to discussing the legal situation that people are making such a big deal about?

A lot of questions could be avoided if you would not read more into the situation than is there. My opinion is that the posture A1 took was unsporting. I would back him up a step to remedy that specific issue.

Not applicable in the least.

As soon as it becomes unsporting in my opinion.

Again, not applicable. This has nothing to do with "personal space." The issue is unsportsmanlike conduct. To make it any more than that is answering a different question. May I remind you of the title of this thread? It is "Unsportsmanlike?".

My point exactly. It is at that very point that I would step in.

No other adjustments need be made. This is a very simple situation that can be taken care of by one explanation. Again, I can't imagine any coach having a problem with that. Actually, his defender will be far more effective if he backed up a step.

Rev, it really isn't up to us to worry about where a defender would be more effective. All those (absurd) questions I asked were aimed at getting to the bottom of what you are trying to do. If you see an unsporting act like this and you feel it necessary, penalize it. I would hope that you would also penalize other unsporting acts in the same manner.

Friend, surely you understand that I was explaining why I think that no coach would have a problem with me backing his player up a step. I would, in no circumstance, make a decision based upon making any player more effective.

I apologize if I have been unclear. I thought it was obvious.

I do not consider backing the player up a step as penalizing him. It is merely good game control in my opinion.

I am working a HS varsity game tonight in Hot Springs with two men I've never met. I'll discuss this situation with them and report back, if anyone is interested what they say.

And there is exactly where the disagreement lies. I, and others, think that most coaches will get in your grill and ask you <b>why</b> you're making their players back up. And the only rules justification that you have for doing so is telling them that you <b>think</b> that what they are doing is unsporting. Well, good luck with that one, Rev. You <b>will</b> be having problems imo.

I'm somewhat at fault here for dragging this whole discussion out. Straight to the point - too many officials worry too much about once-in-a-career situations yet they can't do the fundamental stuff necessary to properly officiate any game let alone a high school varsity game. I'm not speaking to anyone in particular unless you live in Arizona, Nevada, the DC area (Maryland, Northern Virginia and the District) or Mississippi. However, common sense tells me that those aren't the only places where this occurs. This is a quote from Rut and sums up how I feel about this situation:

Originally Posted by JRutledge
...officiating is about concentrating on things that are realistic and getting good and calling or dealing with things that are much more realistic. ... Officials should be concentrating on basic fouls and basic violations. To me to call anything is trying to be a maverick with the rules so that you can prove you know something. This is not solid officiating just to call something because you want everyone to get along.
Peace

Thank you. Thank you so much.

Remember what I've been saying recently about some people not listening to veterans? :D

My life has been dedicated to communicating truth to people. I'm quite sure that I can explain that decision very easily. I've not had a coach "in my grill" in eight years but, if and when it happens, I'll be ready to deal with it. That's the advantage of being 44 instead of 25.

As you know, when it comes to unsporting conduct, there are only three people in the gym whose opinion counts. The coach doesn't have a vote in this one. The officials are the only unbiased people in the gym; therefore, we have to make that judgment.

I guess we'll have to wait and see. In the unlikely event that this scenario presents itself in a game that I am working, I'll have a decision to make.

In all seriousness, what if you say you judge it to be unsporting? I agree that this situation is unlikely to ever happen. And the person being guarded is the best one to deal with it by simply pivoting everytime the guarding person gets in the face. It will soon become apparent what's going on and who's being a jerk, and how silly that is. But if that person does continue even when it's ridiculous (which is sounds to me like what the Rev is saying), wouldn't that border on unsportsmanlike? Isn't that sort of harrassment unsportsmanlike? And isn't that a judgment rather than just a personal opinion?

Please don't make this about anything other than officiating; your calling shouldn't have anything to do with officiating other than how you let your light shine. That might be one of the problems here: 44-8=36; you started officiating at the age of 36. Jurassic, how long have you been officiating? MTD, how about you? My point here is these gentlemen may have been officiating nearly as long as you've been alive.
Sometimes it is difficult for someone to be mature and start officiating. Your success in other areas of life does not automatically make you a seasoned veteran official. Rev, we are having this discussion - over the Internet - but this isn't just about you. This is a problem many places.

Sheez, tom, lighten up. Jurassic and MTD are definitely authoritative but you've never let that stop you from disagreeing with them. SO why is it now a problem when the Rev does it?

I cannot believe this thread keeps going and going...if you judge anything to be unsporting then you address it.

Why would anyone need to ask this question?

Perhaps you should consider that this situation was brought up in an Internet chatroom. Is that not what this place is for? You act as if I am going to go out tonight and look for a reason to make this call. In reality, I'll probably never face this situation. I am not "worried" about it in the least. It was a situation that I had questions about, so I brought it here.

As officials, there are rules that are clear and calls that must be made that require no judgment (double dribble, 3-seconds, backcourt violation, etc...). There are others that do require judgment (block/charge, unsporting conduct, etc...). For an official to make sure that he is making the right judgment call in no way reflects on his ability to make "fundamental" calls.

I meant that Woody said "Good Luck with that" to the Rev saying he THOUGHT that the act was unsporting. I'm asking would it make it easier if the official said he JUDGED it unsporting. This question is important because I'm not good at dealing with coaches, and I'm always trying to get better at it. I know that the wording can make a huge difference.

The reason the thread keeps going and going is that I don't have a life right now, and I"m having fun counting angels dancing on the head of a pin......

But I see your point. I'll go do a Sudoku now, and leave the Rev to defend himself. He's doing pretty well...

Coaches? Who cares.

If you believe, think, judge, opine, suspect and/or in any way detect that something is unsporting address it.

The coaches will agree or disagree. That's not your problem to fix.

Exactly why I have asked several questions since joining this forum. I have learned much and am a better official for having read here.

I've tried my best to deflect this away from me (who was not involved in the situation) and to the scenario I witnessed as a spectator. It seems that others are making this personal, calling my ability to make decisions into question. I assure you, my decision-making ability (thus far) has not been a problem. Had I not left the state of Kansas, I would be working post-season games based upon recommendations from the coaches themselves.

I do understand that some here have advised that, in the event that I make the decision explained in this thread, that may jeopardize those recommendations. I have certainly taken that under advisement.

Its a problem because it is bogus. :D

There were years where I listened to veterans and shut up. I watched how they dressed for games, how they officiate and other things. I really feel like that is missing now. You tell me how to motivate someone who knows they are going to get games regardless of how good of a job they do? You tell me how to get officials to show integrity for the game - do the right thing for 32 or 40 minutes every time out. You tell me how to get someone to be a good partner or at least attempt to improve on their partnering skills. You tell me how to get someone to pay attention to what the heck they are doing on the court. If you can tell me how to do that, I will shut up. Consider those of us here the vast minority. There are officials who don't know anything about this board that are butchering high school games nightly. For many, the only thing that matters is more games and more money.

It isn't even Thanksgiving yet and I've had enough of these officials here (Mississippi). Tonight I'm working with a guy who runs his yap all the time, but cannot officiate! I already know this. I want to be positive, but I know something is going to happen and I could be the one put into the trick bag because I want to make sure both teams have a fair shot at winning the game.

Thank you Rainmaker, now I can probably lighten up since I've go that off my chest! :D

Most, but certainly not all, unsporting technical fouls are judgmental in nature. Some (like swearing at an official, kicking the ball in the stands, pushing an opponent when the play is over, etc.) are no-brainers. They're automatic T's. Other unsporting technical fouls depend on the individual official's tolerance towards certain acts. This thread is probably a heckuva good example of that. The good Reverend obviously has a lower tolerance towards the defender's actions than a lot of other posters, including myself. As I said before, we probably should never let a personal bias enter any call that we make. That's just day-dreaming on my part though, to be quite honest. Everybody sets their own standards as to what comprises unsporting behavior. Those standards vary tremendously. Who's right and who's wrong? Probably no one imo if we all end up getting to the same goal....giving the coaches and players a <b>fair</b> game. And if we are consistent in our judgments at both ends, coaches and players will know what they can or can't do. That's always fair, whether the game is being called strictly or loosely.

Re: this situation, I can only tell you what my own personal opinion is. I think that you should just watch the play and see what develops. If the defender gets some bumps in or yaps a little, call it. Let them know that you're keeping an eye on them. If the defender's main goal is ball denial, then I'm not going to put the defender at an unfair advantage either. If I can't think up a rule to apply, then I ain't gonna make up a new one. The defender deserves to be treated <b>exactly</b> the same as his opponent.

Jmo, but I think that this a time to be reactive, not proactive.

My tolerance is much higher with the coaches than it is with the players. I can count on one hand the 'T's' I've given a coach. Please remember, I never stated that I would handle this situation with a 'T;' I would simply back him up a step.

Well said. This is exactly how I would handle the situation. Sadly, the officials (two) did not monitor the situation (at least not in the first half. I left at half time to take my wife on a date ;) ).

For what it is worth, I explained this situation to my two partners this evening. Nate - an official from Little Rock for 17 years - said that he would "sit the player down until he's ready to play defense." Obviously, I do not agree with this action. Basically, he was saying that he would not allow it.

Luke - an official from Hot Springs for 4 years - said that he would allow the defense when his team was on defense but not during dead balls or when his team was on offense.

LOL!!

The range of opinion and judgment is so interesting, and it's one of the most fun things about officiating -- as long as it doesn't get too personal. For some reason, this cheers me up enormously. I suppose I should move to Arkansas where at least three officials share my views about this situation.

It sounds like good defense. If there's contact then officiate the contact.

Oh, now we understand why you believe that this should be a T. :D

Seriously, this topic has sparked a good discussion about judgment and discretion in officiating. You have expressed your thoughts and others have responded with theirs. All that is now required is for you to give some consideration to these varied opinions and let this process further your background in making future judgment calls. Whether you agree or disagree with the views expressed by anyone else in this thread is not important. Whether you spend some time in reflection thus improving and preparing yourself to better handle future situations that you will encounter as an official is.

Best wishes.

I can't agree with it either. He has no rules support for taking such action. In fact, he is clearly overstepping his role as a game official. Sounds like someone on a power trip to me.

How can Luke dictate to a player what he can and can't do when his team has the ball? :(

This person seems a bit inexperienced and clearly needs to learn some things. I seem to recall a statement to the effect that guarding doesn't just take place against the player with the ball. At the moment I can't recall where I saw it. Perhpas in either the case book or an NFHS interp. I'll try to locate it.

Furthermore, there is currently a big discussion regarding when a team is, in fact, on defense which would put this official's stated criterion to the test. The central crux is does defense occur when neither team has team control? For example, during a throw-in. If A1 is attempting to inbound, would Luke forbid B2 from fronting A2 as close as possible?

Great advice - Thank you.

Simply but, this sort of tactic when the ball is not in play is not basketball. There is no place for it on the court and to allow it is to open the door for much worse. Call it preventative officiating but this sort of act WILL lead to a fight. If the ball is not in play, I consider this taunting.

I admit that I have not read all of this thread - it's way too long and I'm, well, I'm not really busy because I'm a teacher and it's the last day before a 5-day weekend and the kids are taking a test but that's beside the point...anyway, why would this not fall under the heading of "making a mockery of the game"? If A1 is 'defending' B1 while A has the ball or at other times when there is no need for defense to be played, why would that not be a mockery of the game? Seems to me like it has no place on the court and I believe I would take care of it early.

Mockery - or should that be "travesty"?? Either way, I don't believe I would let it continue.

Update: I had A's coach in a tourney game this evening. The game discussed in this thread came up. He told me that he was expecting the officials to back his player up; he was surprised they didn't.

Rev, this may have been answered earlier, but if so, I missed it. Was the player B in the OP talented enough to in any way justify all the extra attention? You say he was frustrated and ineffective, so may we conclude that this extreme defensive strategy was successful, or did the other 4 kill 'em?

B1 was not the main scorer but he was a key player, no doubt. This defensive strategy worked brilliantly. The other players did not step up. I left at half time but heard that the second half was just like the first.

We are asking for coach's advice on rules interpretations now? :rolleyes:

Peace

How did you possibly arrive at this conclusion? Where did anyone ask, or even imply that they asked, a coach for advice? I sure hope you do not exercise this type of careless discretion on the court. :eek:

Sadly, this type of misrepresentation makes your input suspect, in my humble opinion.

You talked to a coach about the play and then you posted here what that coach said (as to support your position, there was no other reason to post that comment). I do not recall that I said you asked anyone anything. But if you talked to a coach, what relevance does that have to do with what have been discussed here? Coaches do not know rules like officials and most officials here said you cannot call something without some how circumventing the rules to do it. I am not trying to revisit the entire issue.

I do not know how you can get upset about what I said and you are the one that is trying to justify your position. Then again I am not the one trying to make my way the way you are and have seemed to have been as you have posted here. So I think my judgment is not questioned very much as an official. Now you on the other hand might be in a little different category considering you have not done many of the things I have. I was not asking you anything based on this, but you did bring it up.

Also if you read this board often you do not see me coming to this board asking for you input about what to do or not do as an official in these minor rules or mechanical issues. I did not go watch JH games wondering what needs to be called, that would apply to you.

Peace

There you go again with your nasty habit of misrepresenting the facts. I was discussing this coach's season and he brought up that particular game. He knew I was there watching. He volunteered the information that he was surprised the officials allowed his man to play that tight. I would never discuss a fellow official's actions with a coach. Ethics are more important to me than opportunities.

Who were you implying did ask when you said, "We are asking for coach's advice on rules interpretations now?" Were you talking about you and someone else?

It was for the many who posted in this thread that did agree that the situation should have been handled differently.

Not if you look at it from the perspective of sportsmanship instead of legal guarding position, which was my point of the entire thread.

Perhaps you should.

I assure you, friend, I am not upset in the least. I've had to deal with a Board of Deacons for many years now, Plus, I've been married since you were 10 years old. Having a mother-in-law for 25 years, your comments do not upset me in the least.

What??

Nor is mine. I have references. :D

I started coaching basketball when I was 24. I coached until I was 37 and then I began to officiate. However, I'll gladly admit that I have not made a career of officiating. That is why I ask questions. I have a desire to get it right, especially if I got it wrong before.

I guess I'm not too proud to ask questions about that which I am unclear. If my questions are beneath you, please do not feel obligated to respond.

For the record, this was a HS Varsity boys game. But again, I am not too proud to learn from officials working the JH level.

Rev,

The bottom line is I asked a question. If you are so offended or defensive because someone asked a question, I do not know why you even asked the question in the first place or made the comment to support your position (which that is how I see it). Now if that was not the case, so be it. It is really not that big of a deal. Then again, I guess as a Reverend that is how you handle adversity. I can see why people have less and less faith in their lives when people like you react to issues that are not life altering. I know you are human, but man relax it will be alright. This thread was dead and you resurrected it to tell us something that was not relevant to the discussion. Who cares what a coach thinks? I know I do not.

Peace

Rev.Ref63:

Earlier this season you watch a game played by Team A where Team B employs a box-in-one defense against A1. Later in the season you officiate a Team A game. Why in the world are you spending so much time with Head Coach A that you can have a discussion about one of his team's previous games.

The first time you should have been talking to Head Coach A was approximately sixty seconds before the start of the game to introduce yourself and ask if his team is properly equipped. Nothing more, nothing less. I am sorry but it is unprofessional on your part to be having a conversation for any reason with either coach before the game.

MTD, Sr.

This, my friend, is not adversity. The loss of a child, a financial crisis, a health crisis, these can be considered as adversity. To have a disagreement on an internet forum with someone I've never met cannot begin to be equated with adversity. I've had people sit across my desk with life-changing decisions to make before they leave my office. That, my friend, is an exercise in judgment. The decisions I have to make on the basketball court pale in comparison.


People like me? You mean preachers in general or just preachers that happen to officiate? If you base your opinion of preachers of what you read on the internet, then you don't know preachers in the least.

Apparently you do, friend. You stated earlier in this thread that my decision may not be accepted well by a coach who knew the rules. So, are you saying that your calls are based upon what the coaches think of your calls?

You also said that coaches do not know the rules like the officials. If that is the case, then I am in no danger of having this judgment questioned. You can't have it both ways.

I'll be honest, this is the first time that I've had this suggested. In nearly every game that I've worked, the crew has had some type of dialog with the coaches before the game.

I agree with you, but you are acting as if someone is accusing you of violating your Pastoral Ethics. I just wanted to know when we were asking for coaches for their opinions on these issues. I did not think that was a bad question.

The basis of my opinion is only based on what you try to represent in your signature and the way you responded to a non-confrontational question.


Actually I do not care. I just asked a question of you and you responded as if I went after you personally. Then you attacked me in a personal way that was not called for based on the nature of this conversation.

I said coaches do not know the rules like coaches; it has nothing to do with judgment. I do not know what way I am trying to have it. I just found it curious that you put so much stock into what a coach said. I would not go as far as Mark did, but I find it curious why you would be talking to a coach before a game about a game you witnessed. That does reek of some behavior that is not professional, but sometimes I have been in situations when coaches ask about things games I was not apart of. It is hard to avoid those conversations sometimes (host coach might be the AD and shows you to the locker-room). But to come back here to justify that is curious. It is really curious as to why you reacted to a simple question.

Peace

I'd consider MTD Sr.'s suggestion, Rev; it's a good one. The only "dialog" that officials should be having with a coach before a game should only be as a direct response to a rules question.

Sorry it took so long for me to respond. I had to take time to preach tonight. The sermon was entitled: How to Deal With Adversity. :D
Just kidding.

I apologize if you feel that I attacked you; that was certainly not my intentions. My basis for sharing the conversation with this coach was the fact that you gave your opinion on how this coach would have reacted had the officials handled the situation the way in which I said I would probably handle it. You may be correct that some coaches would react as such, but this coach, by his own admission, would not have. That was simply my point.

I visited with this coach before the game. It was a Saturday tournament and when I arrived at the gym, I discovered that the schedule was about 45 minutes behind. The game before mine was still in the second quarter. One partner had not yet arrived and the other was working the game in progress. The coach, knowing me from previous games, chatted with me for about 20 minutes until it was time for me to change.

I have no animosity toward you in the least. I was a bit surprised that you would call my integrity and judgment into question over a disagreement so trivial, especially when many on here seemed to understand and agree with me.

Again, I apologize if I've offended you in any way. I have, and will continue to value your input and insight into the variety of questions posed on this forum. Many I have read and agreed with without ever joining the discussion.

Rev.Ref63:

I am sorry, but you aren't going to like what I am about to say. You had absolutely no business chatting with this coach before his game which you were going to officiate. No matter how innocent the conversation was, it was the appearence of impropriety that everybody will see. It was unprofessional conduct. I am sorry but I am not going to let your off the hook on this one.

I know that you were once a coach, but once you become an official you are an official first even if you still continue to coach and that means you must conduct yourself as an official at all times, even when you are coaching. I would suggest that you go to http://www.NFHS.org or http://www.NASO.org or http://www.IAABO.org and check out the officiating codes of ethics on any of these websites.

MTD, Sr.

Since I am a Pastor, would you allow me to share a verse with you?
Proverbs 12:1 Whoso loveth instruction loveth knowledge: but he that hateth reproof is brutish [foolish]. (KJV)
I have no problem accepting correction and reproof from those who are more learned in these areas. Only a fool would not take this counsel under advisement.

I will check them out.

From the NASO website:
I can see where chatting with an opposing coach before the game may be considered as compromising my impartiality. A word to the wise is sufficient.

I am a big guy I can deal with adversity and someone coming after me. After all that happens every time I am on the court. ;)

Having said all of that, I am really surprised by your reaction because what I said was an honest question. I just want to know what value any coach has to this kind of discussion. What they think is not something I would be concerned with or what any other officials worth their salt would know about.

I am not going there with Mark on this one. I know how you can be approached by a coach when you were not seeking their approval. Yesterday I talked briefly with the coach because they were in the room we were getting dressed. I do not see every conversation with a coach as unprofessional just because it happened by for the game.

I did not even call your integrity into question. I just asked a question because what the coach in my eyes has no value. Even if the coach agreed with my position, his opinion would not be something that I feel meant anything. I stand by your interpretation is not based on the rules but based on more of a "moral" issue as to where someone can or cannot stand. And I feel that when you call a T, you better be doing things that are supported than just thinking something is more than what it really is.

You did not offend me. You do not have to apologize for that. I was surprised by your reaction, but it takes more to offend me than what you said to me.

Peace

I realize this discussion is over, but I want to clarify that your comment about me talking to the coach was not what I was referring to. I was referring to earlier posts in which you called my judgment and integrity into question for suggesting that I would intervene if this scenario were to occur in my game.

I agree 100% that the coach's input has no bearing on our calls, but I disagree that a coach's opinion has no value. I would take the coach's comments as an opportunity to study the issue more closely and make sure that I get it right.

I do not know how I questioned your integrity. I might have questioned your judgment and the reasoning behind that judgment. I think you are being a little sensitive when you are so worried about what I said in this. I was not the only person that took my position and I even did not continue most of the conversation. I just do not think your logic is anything but feeling uneasy about something rather than having a solid rules interpretation to back that up. And as I have said that if this is what you want to call that is your issue. When we call Ts, officials usually have to explain them. In my opinion you would have to really explain that one and I would not doubt that it affects how you are viewed if you were working with and assignor and that was your logic.

Well the coach's opinion has no value to me. Maybe what he has to say has value to you. Coaches want anything called that is going to benefit them. And I do not need to hear what a coach says to change or develop my opinion on this. This situation raises more issues that can become bigger issues if you do what you suggest.

Peace

When you implied that I would make a decision regardless of rules support, was questioning my integrity as an official, in my opinion. Granted, I may have been overly sensitive, but integrity is a huge part of my profession.

This poses another problem. I have continually expressed that I would not have handled this with a 'T' yet, you still imply that I would. That is simply not the case. That changes the whole scenario.

You are reading far more into this than is here. I would take any and all talk from coaches and other officials to improve my ability to make the right call. I am not too proud to admit that I've been wrong and a coach has been right. In Kansas, coaches attended the very same rules meetings as did the officials. They, for the most part, at least understand the rules.

Let me be clear that any personal reflection of what a coach says would occur after the game and not during the game. I would never change my call due to a coaches input during a game.

hmmm...so the rest of us don't need to worry as much about our own integrity for some reason?

I would hope you are as concerned with your personal integrity as I am with mine, regardless of your profession. Did I imply otherwise?

Having rules support means a lot of things to me. It means do the rules explicitly say this is illegal? Is there an official interpretation that supports this specific situation (Casebook or NF literature sent out recently)? Was this the spirit of the rule when create? As far as I know you have none of those things. That has nothing to do with your integrity. People make rulings all the time and they are not supported by the rules clearly and this is the reason every year there is a clarification or a rules change to mirror what is intended. That is also the reason new rules are created because a certain action needs to be stopped or clarify what is allowed because of the rule. I was questioning your knowledge of the rule you wanted to invoke, I am not sure how that involves your integrity. Newer officials do not know many aspects of the rules because they have not been around a long time. That does not mean their integrity is in question. I think you really are taking what is being said on an internet site to heart way too much.

I am not here to debate this issue all over again. I do know that you are the only person I can think of that has even brought this up as an issue. I even deal with newer officials a lot and they do not bring up this issue. What is funny if this was outlawed I would have seen several Ts in games since by officials that do not even know this web site exists. Or every time there is a throw-in is attempted, there would be someone thinking something needs to be done. I cannot recall another official even bring up the issue, but you have. I do not know what you expect people to think. I feel you are (not you personally) what you talk about.

Look, you have every right to ignore everything I have said and the reasoning behind it. I just find it odd that you brought this issue to the forefront and you wanted opinions. When you got those opinions you seem to want to justify what you feel. There is nothing wrong with your debating this issue, but you seem to be so offended that people would suggest that they disagree with you. Rev, I do not know you personally and I certainly will not be working with you anytime soon whether you or I want that to happen. If you feel you are right then do what you feel works for you. I just offered an opinion to the situation and you are even seeking my opinion in other situations that are unimportant to me in the bigger picture.

Peace

Well, to be honest - no, some of us probably don't have to worry about our integrity as much as others. Some professions are held to a higher standard than others. That's just the way it is...someone questioning my integrity really poses no threat to my real career, but for a Pastor, it can and does.

I am not offended that people would disagree at all. However, many seemed to understand and agree with me that something should have been done. It was the misrepresentation and the misunderstanding of the scenario that prompted me to continue this discussion for clarity sake.

Also, I am not trying to justify how I "feel." I am trying to gain an understanding as to how others would handle it. Some clearly indicated they would handle it as I would. Others indicated they would do nothing. I can live with that.

It obvious that others have similar questions as well due to similar threads being started. To characterize one's ability to make fundamental calls based on this scenario is unfair in my opinion.

For the record, I would very much enjoy the opportunity to work with you.

I am not misrepresenting anything. I am responding to what you said and I was not the only person that took a similar position. I am not sure why you are picking on me (maybe because I keep responding to this thread. WWWWHHHHHYYYYYYYYYYYYY???????)?

Rev,

Call what you feel is right. I gave you my opinion, I stand by that opinion and I will continue to voice my opinion in similar fashion. If you feel I do not like what I have to say to you, feel free like many others claim they do and ignore them. I am not the person that is going to hold you accountable for what you call anyway.

Peace

I'll let your post stand as the last word. Thanks for the time and effort you put into this discussion.

My son lives in northern Illinois. He and his wife are expecting our first grandchild. Perhaps when we get up that way to see them, I'll have an opportunity to catch a high school game with you and we can laugh about this. That is, if you ever work in the Joliet area.

I have games in multiple parts of the state. I am working in New Lenox on Friday and in near the Peoria area on Saturday. I will be working in Bloomington around Christmas again; we will just have to see. After all this is a funny conversation to some extent. I did not expect the issues to turn the way they did. ;)

Peace

I am working around Marion, IL (down state) in February of next year. I worked as Assistant Pastor in a church there several years ago, and the Christian school is hosting a tournament that they've asked me to help officiate. I don't get the opportunity to do many Christian school games so I am looking forward to it.

BTW, I was raised in Lincoln, IL and went to college in East Peoria.

Gee, I don't want to get involved in all of the other issues....they're way too deep for me.....but from an officiating standpoint, I think that you're making a heckuva mistake if you include coaches as part of your learning process. Their agendas are completely different than ours. The only "right" call that they really care about is a call that will benefit their team. Their knowledge of the rules, mechanics, etc. is generally not good enough to be of any value either.

No good is going to come out of pre-game conversations with coaches, Rev.

Let me be clear in saying that my conversation with this coach prior to the game was purely social. He recognized me and came to chat. During the course of the conversation he mentioned the game in question. I did not and would not ask this coach or any other coach for advice on mechanics or rules interpretation.

My point is, when making a call, such as the 2-10 call we made in that same tournament, I hear what the coach is saying and then go home and make sure that I got the call right. As it turns out, the coach was right and I was wrong in the 2-10 situation. Now I know and will not miss it next time. If I'd of had the attitude, "I don't care what the coach says; I think I'm right" then, I would continue to get 2-10 situations wrong every time.

At the point I am at in my officiating career, I try to take every opportunity to learn something that will make me a better official. If it is a word from a coach, so be it.

And let me be just as clear that imo it's just as bad to socialize with a coach before a game. Perception is reality. And the "reality" to anyone watching is that you're just having a good ol' time chatting up your dear friend, the coach.

If you want to socialize, get a room.....a room where nobody can see you.

Note that I'm past the point where I'm saying this for your benefit. You obviously disagree. That's fine with me; that's <b>your</b> right. I'd just like other new officials to think about what the image of an official and a coach socializing publicly before a game looks like to the other team, it's coaching staff, supporters, etc., not to mention your partners. As I said, to them perception is reality.

Btw, my association makes it easy for it's members. We simply inserted in our "Code of Conduct" that thou shall not socialize with <b>anyone</b> before games.

Again, it's jmo. But my opinion is that your pre-game socializing is gonna jump up and bite you in your hassock one day.

The next time I'm on time for a tournament game and find the schedule behind 45 minutes, and a coach approaches me, I'll pick up my suitcase and run for the dressing room. That would be far more professional. :rolleyes:

I didn't want to socialize, but obviously the coach did. Do you remember me saying anything about the coach approaching me?

No, actually I don't disagree. Perhaps you should go back and read where I acknowledged that this is not a good practice. That is why I do not make a practice of it.

Do you blow everything out of proportion like this?

That would be a great big YES. I wouldn't run, but I would say hello and then excuse myself to find the officials' dressing room.

MTD, Sr.

You needn't run, but anything more than about a 30-second conversation should likely be avoided.

I am going to have to say something here. I agree that you should not talk to coaches, but that is not always easy in tournament situations. Whether it is when you enter the gym or in the hospitality room, you will come in contact with coaches.

The thing I would recommend that most officials do is to go to a part of the gym that you are not going to be an easy target for someone to approach you. Usually that means sitting high in the stands away from most incoming traffic if you are going to watch an early game or a game after your game. I think being professional as an official is saying basically hi and bye and keeping conversations at a minimum.

Peace

Normally, I arrive at and leave the gym with the crew. There is never a problem this way. However, in a tournament setting, the crew may not be able to arrive at the same time. It is good advice to seek an inconspicuous place to wait out of the traffic area.

In this specific instance, I was sitting just outside the dressing room door watching the game.

Hey, like I've already stated, I could care less what you do. You've made it quite clear that you don't agree with me, or anyone else. That's fine. You want to socialize? Then socialize. Don't put it down as being "professional" though. It's sureasheck isn't imo.

Perhaps when you've learned to comprehend what you read we can continue this discussion. :eek:

You do understand, don't you, that this means that you really do care what I do. Did you mean to say, "I couldn't care less what you do?" :D

That's not a very Christian attitude.

RevRef -- I wish this discussion hadn't gotten so testy. You are a welcome (to me) member of this board, and I hope you won't be chased away. Sometimes Rutledge and sometimes Jurassic can become, well, grouchy. And sometimes either of them can appear to be grouchy by the way the words appear on the screen. You just have to learn to walk away from the discussion by saying.....



wait for it.....



Thank you.

Strongly.

Sooo...please list the professions that in your opinion do not require a high standard of integrity. Other than politician.

I beg to differ. Jesus, quite often, rebuked the multitudes for hearing His very simple teaching and yet refusing to understand [comprehend] what He was saying.
Matthew 15:10 And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: (KJV)
Matthew 24:15 ...whoso readeth, let him understand: (KJV)

It is tiresome to continue to explain and even admit that I made a mistake and declare that I would correct the mistake, only to have someone accuse me of not agreeing. Apparently he is unable to understand what he reads.

This will be a great spot for me to bow out of this discussion. I believe that I've said everything I wanted to say.

Thank you to all those who offered their input. Regardless of how some may characterize my position, I did learn some valuable lessons from this thread that will make me a better official.

Used car salesman?

Please quote the verse where Jesus called to the mulitude to say he'll get back to them when their reading comprehension improves. Which you've just done again btw.

...isn't there a cute holier-than-thou smiley we can put here...?

I seriously doubt I have ever been grouchy by a conversation on a discussion board. I know this might become a shock to some people, but they are just words. If that upsets people then I feel it says more about them then me. And if you were paying attention to this conversation, I did not ever call someone a name or accuse anyone of anything. I even spent many posts clarifying my position. Juulie, I have seen you use much more harsh words in the past few months than anything I have said in this post. I can tell you not one time was I ever offended by your words. ;)

Peace