Coach Issues

[Corndog89]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

We just disagree philosophically, Corndoggie. Nothing personal, fer sure.

Agree completely. And I don't disagree with your position on this...just sounded like the original poster may have reacted somewhat defensively and maybe could have handled it differently; but I wasn't there so I don't really know. But he also did ask "anything I could have done better?" so I gave my thoughts. There's more than one way to skin any cat. The boys are a little tender now, though, thanks

[tomegun]

Jurassic Referee is funny! "...you'd be better off looking to raise a new crop of testicles too...." Classic!

The only thing I would have done differently, and was not mentioned, is give the explanation. First of all, it wasn't a question it was a comment - don't answer the comment. Secondly, I wouldn't have this much discussion with the assistant anyway. Finally, the IW made this a sticky situation. Putting the ball back into play will often force a coach to...wait for it...coach his/her team.
Other than that, when the time is right stick (the coach/offender) and move (on). It is just a call that is earned. Once the unsporting behavior occurs, why is this different from a foul or violation that occurs? The officials didn't do it, they just put air in the whistle with the backing of the rulebook.

If an official gives an unwarranted T then damn it, the official is wrong!
If an official does not give a warranted T then damn it, the official is wrong and the next official may have to deal with the same behavior!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by tomegun

Jurassic Referee is funny! "...you'd be better off looking to raise a new crop of testicles too...." Classic!

From your thread, it looks like the MHSAA e-mail basically said the same thing to some of your fellow officials.

Btw, kudos to whoever wrote that. He recognized that they have a problem and he wants something done about it. It's nice for an official to know that someone has got his back after he takes care of bidness.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

From your thread, it looks like the MHSAA e-mail basically said the same thing to some of your fellow officials.

Btw, kudos to whoever wrote that. He recognized that they have a problem and he wants something done about it. It's nice for an official to know that someone has got his back after he takes care of bidness.

Absolutely!

[Ignats75]

Only one way to handle the in game incident. "Coach, get control of your bench" at minimum or an immediate T on bench personnel which is an indirect on the HC. I never speak to or allow a AC to have a conversation with me about a call. ANY complaint about a call from a AC warrants ONE warning and then a WHACK. Stops alot of problems.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by Ignats75

Only one way to handle the in game incident. "Coach, get control of your bench" at minimum or an immediate T on bench personnel which is an indirect on the HC. I never speak to or allow a AC to have a conversation with me about a call. ANY complaint about a call from a AC warrants ONE warning and then a WHACK. Stops alot of problems.

This sounds like an absolute and many veterans (Rut) rightfully talk about not having absolutes. However, if you want to have an absolute either way (always talking to an assistant or never talking to an assistant), I think you've chosen the correct absolute.

[Ignats75]

Its a close to an abbsolute as I do have. But, we all have absolutes. I defy anyone one here to say that they wouldn't ever give a T to a player that dropped an N-Bomb on an opponent. Or called an official a sonuvabeech. We all have absolutes. Its just where you draw the line

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Ignats75

Its a close to an abbsolute as I do have. But, we all have absolutes. I defy anyone one here to say that they wouldn't ever give a T to a player that dropped an N-Bomb on an opponent. Or called an official a sonuvabeech. We all have absolutes. Its just where you draw the line

I don't think I have any word that is an absolute ("automatic"). To call it such, you paint yourself into a corner where no matter what the circumstances, you have to call it.

In the area I work now, I'm pretty sure there wouldn't be an occasion where an Nbomb between opponents would go without a whistle. But, there may be half a dozen African American players in this valley that I'm aware of.

Even if the area was more "diverse", I highly doubt I'd hear it in anything but an unsporting context. I just don't think it deserves the moniker "absolute" or "automatic." The more I think, the more I can foresee some odd circumstances in which I might not call it.

As for your second example, it could depend on the way it was said and the atmosphere in which it was said. I'm 99% sure I'd call it, but I'm just not sure.

Now, if you want to get more specific with these scenarios, you could probably come up with something I wouldn't feel the need to leave wiggle room on. But about the time you get specific enough to draw an approval for the term "automatic," you get too narrow to make the term mean anything.