Calling coaches by name.
 

I just got my Officials Quarterly magazine in yesterday,and it had a very interesting article in it entitled( Whats in a Name?) on page 4. I do call coaches by name if I know both of them well, but if you only know one of them I don't feel comfortable just calling the one I know by name. I want the other coach to feel comfortable with me on the floor when he is on the road. I guess what I am trying to say is if he hears me calling the coach I know by name all night he might think he is going to get the shaft. I think the article is coming from a baseball/softball umpire, but it still fits in this topic. Do most of you guys address the coach as coach or by his name? I personally like to communicate by name if possible. Thanks in advance.

I always get both coaches names in pregame, but I rarely use them. I generally only use first names if we get into a situation where emotions might be escalating and they are really looking for something, I've found that if I can say "Jim I honestly didn't have it", it tends to remind them that we are human and seems to calm them down a little faster than "Coach I didn't have it"....most games though "Coach" will suffice and you are right it doesn't make one side wonder why you called her "Sue" and called me "coach", when you might not even realize that you are doing it...

Richard Siegel, the article's author, is a member here (I've only seen him post on the baseball side), so he might be interested in this thread.

I personally don't like to use a coach's name during a game. It's similar to addressing a judge as "Your honor": this is done only in the courtroom, when the judge is on the bench (otherwise, you can call the judge "judge"). This tradition creates a certain distance between the judge and the people in court, and that distance is good for the impartiality of the proceedings.

In the same way, when I'm wearing the stripes it's important that I be perceived as impartial. I like the impersonal distance created by using "coach," even if I happen to know the coach's name. It emphasizes our roles in the contest rather than our personal relationship (whatever that might be).

I know both coaches names prior to the game. I am careful not to use it too much during the game though.

I don't like the coaches or even players to call me ref, stripes, or even sir. I tell the captain's our names and tell them to feel free to call us by them (no one ever has).

If you are saying, "Brian, I didn't see that", all night, Brian is the one getting the shaft..... :)

Ha well done! I'd rather he tell Brian that than me if my name is Pete!

Or Brian is a whiner.

Peace

:D

I call them all "coach."

Ditto.

I also don't see the coaches but maybe 2x a year,:) , so it's not like I develop relationships with them.......

Same here. Only in the pregame may I use their names...and only if I know the names of both coaches....and only the last names. "Good evening Coach Smith. Good evening Coach Johnson". After that, it's just "coach".

The author stated that the idea came from professional umpires, who typically work in series of 3 /4 games where this type of relationship would come naturally. He expanded on the idea that for this to work for him on the HS level, it took a conscious effort to develop that relationship even for that game only, but in his opinion was worth the effort towards effective game management. YMMMV.

I've been doing high school ball long enough now that I know most of the coaches both on and off the court. If I'm working a game with two coaches that I know and that know each other, it just seems silly to me to pretend that we don't all know each other.

If, on the other hand, one of the teams is from out of the area, I'll call them both "coach".

In my college games, I don't know most of them off the court, and most of my games have at least one coach from out of the area. So I almost always just stick with "coach".

I've found "Darlin'" works well.

...not that there's anything wrong with that...:p