Whaddya got?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The IHSA State Policy is for all head coaches to attend the all sportsmanship meetings. If they do not do this, then we have the right or obligation to write them up with a Special Report. So it is mandatory for this meeting to involve the coaches and captains. And we have been doing this before there was a policy with the NF based on some inappropriate comments that were made by an official and the meeting has to take place near or right in front of the scorer's table (not near mid-court).

Peace

It is also clear that only the haead coach can verify that "all players are legally and properly equipped."

So, even in the rare instance that the HC doesn't attend the meeting, I make sure to ask the coach that question before the game.

[tomegun]

In Mississippi, we have a meeting with the game administrator and coaches before the meeting with the captains. At the first meeting we give them cards with our names on it so they can rate (BS) us after the game. In this state, I don't see how they could get out of this. It would be so obvious that they are acting like jerks when everyone is waiting on them.

There is really no way I think a coach walking away should be a T. However, that coach has clearly showed the he/she doesn't want to communicate during that game. A time will come during the contest where the coach will want to talk. Handle this accordingly.

[stosh]

Originally Posted by Whistles & Stripes

The crew went over and exchanged pleasantries with the assistant, and life went on. Ater thinking about it some more, one of them said that if he had it to do over again, he would have whacked him for unsportsmanlike conduct.

Thoughts on that?

You don't need to "break into jail". If he's that much of a jerk, he'll earn one soon enough.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

1) He/she is in charge of the team from the head coach down to the last priest, rabbi, nun, witch doctor, orthopedic surgeon, and anybody else that is considered bench personnel by the team. This does not mean that the head coach is not in charge of bench personnel, because he is, it just means he is subordinate to the team captain, and that if the head coach cannot control his bench then his captain will.

Meadow muffins. Are you going to assess an indirect technical foul to the captain if there is a T charged to bench personnel? No.

That paragraph is a lovely picture, a nice ideal; but it's simply not reality. The coach is NEVER subordinate to the team captain and the captain is NEVER responsible for the behavior of the bench. Why spout all that?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Meadow muffins. Are you going to assess an indirect technical foul to the captain if there is a T charged to bench personnel? No.

That paragraph is a lovely picture, a nice ideal; but it's simply not reality. The coach is NEVER subordinate to the team captain and the captain is NEVER responsible for the behavior of the bench. Why spout all that?

Scrapper:

MEADOW MUFFINS!! Is that like a Crock of Horse Manure?

MTD, Sr.


P.S. I had a long weekend and I really don't feel like going into a long discourse but trust me on this one, because I could write a fairly long article on this subject but the history of who can request a timeout and who could and could not talk to the players on the court during a timeout is a good example as to why the captain and not the coach who is in charge of the team. And you know I would never steer you wrong.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

the history of who can request a timeout and who could and could not talk to the players on the court during a timeout is a good example as to why the captain and not the coach who is in charge of the team.

I need a translation on this, but, whatever it is, I think I still agree with scrapper.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I have had a long weekend and I really didn't want to write an article but I guess I am going to have to write one.


Allowing the Head Coach to request a timeout in NFHS and NCAA Men's games is a recent development. This rule change was a straight adoption of the NCAA Women's timeout request rule. The NCAA Women's timeout request rule was one of the NAGWS rules used by the AIAW and the NCAA for women's college basketball before the NCAA Women's Basketball Rules Committee was created. The NAGWS timeout request rule was an adaption of the FIBA timeout request rule; it combined the NBCUSC (National Basketball Committee of the United States and Canada and is the legal predecessor of the NFHS and NCAA Men’s (which eventually became the NCAA Men’s/Women’s Rules Committees) rules committees).

If one goes back in time even further (try the late 1930’s and early 1940’s) and one will see that the Head Coach could not talk directly with the players on the court during timeouts and between quarters. When a team’s request for a timeout was granted the players of both teams had to huddle on the court and could not talk directly with their Head Coaches.

As one peruses the rules below (I couldn't quote the rules because of space limitations), one will see that the Head Coach is rarely mentioned. Some of his most important duties include designating who shall shoot technical free throws (and this to was also only the duty of the Team Captain until recently), designating replacements for disqualified and injured players, and informing the game official whether a team’s timeout request is for a thirty second or a full timeout.

As one can see the NBCUSC wanted the Team Captain to be the supreme leader of the team and not the Head Coach. Today’s rules still reflect that philosophy.


NFHS, NCAA, and NBCUSC rules.

NFHS:

NFHS R3-S1-A2 NFHS R3-S3-A1e

NFHS R8-S3-A1 NFHS R10-S5-A1

NFHS R10-S5-A2 NFHS R10-S5-A3

NFHS R10-S5-A4


NCAA:

NCAA R3-S2-A1 NCAA R3-S4-A18

NCAA R8-S2-A3 NCAA R10-S4

NCAA R10-S4-A4a, b, d, e NCAA R10-S4-A5


NBCUSC: National Basketball Committee of the United States and Canada

This is the legal predecessor to the NFHS and NCAA Men's/Women's Rules committees.


NAGWS: National Association of Girls and Women in Sports.

The Basketball Rules Committee for women's college basketball (and girls' H.S. in some states in the Northeast) for the AIAW and NCAA women's basketball prior to the creation of the NCAA Women's Rules Committee.


FIBA:

FIBA R3-A6.1 FIBA R3-A6.2

FIBA R3-A7.1 FIBA R3-A7.2

FIBA R3-A7.3 FIBA R3-A7.4

FIBA R3-A7.5 FIBA R3-A7.6

FIBA R3-A7.7 FIBA R3-A7.8

FIBA R3-A7.9 FIBA R4-A19.1

FIBA R4-19.3.1 FIBA R3-A7.9

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I have had a long weekend and I really didn't want to write an article but I guess I am going to have to write one.


Allowing the Head Coach to request a timeout in NFHS and NCAA Men's games is a recent development. This rule change was a straight adoption of the NCAA Women's timeout request rule. The NCAA Women's timeout request rule was one of the NAGWS rules used by the AIAW and the NCAA for women's college basketball before the NCAA Women's Basketball Rules Committee was created. The NAGWS timeout request rule was an adaption of the FIBA timeout request rule; it combined the NBCUSC (National Basketball Committee of the United States and Canada and is the legal predecessor of the NFHS and NCAA Men’s (which eventually became the NCAA Men’s/Women’s Rules Committees) rules committees).

If one goes back in time even further (try the late 1930’s and early 1940’s) and one will see that the Head Coach could not talk directly with the players on the court during timeouts and between quarters. When a team’s request for a timeout was granted the players of both teams had to huddle on the court and could not talk directly with their Head Coaches.

As one peruses the rules below (I couldn't quote the rules because of space limitations), one will see that the Head Coach is rarely mentioned. Some of his most important duties include designating who shall shoot technical free throws (and this to was also only the duty of the Team Captain until recently), designating replacements for disqualified and injured players, and informing the game official whether a team’s timeout request is for a thirty second or a full timeout.

As one can see the NBCUSC wanted the Team Captain to be the supreme leader of the team and not the Head Coach. Today’s rules still reflect that philosophy.


NFHS, NCAA, and NBCUSC rules.

NFHS:

NFHS R3-S1-A2 NFHS R3-S3-A1e

NFHS R8-S3-A1 NFHS R10-S5-A1

NFHS R10-S5-A2 NFHS R10-S5-A3

NFHS R10-S5-A4


NCAA:

NCAA R3-S2-A1 NCAA R3-S4-A18

NCAA R8-S2-A3 NCAA R10-S4

NCAA R10-S4-A4a, b, d, e NCAA R10-S4-A5


NBCUSC: National Basketball Committee of the United States and Canada

This is the legal predecessor to the NFHS and NCAA Men's/Women's Rules committees.


NAGWS: National Association of Girls and Women in Sports.

The Basketball Rules Committee for women's college basketball (and girls' H.S. in some states in the Northeast) for the AIAW and NCAA women's basketball prior to the creation of the NCAA Women's Rules Committee.


FIBA:

FIBA R3-A6.1 FIBA R3-A6.2

FIBA R3-A7.1 FIBA R3-A7.2

FIBA R3-A7.3 FIBA R3-A7.4

FIBA R3-A7.5 FIBA R3-A7.6

FIBA R3-A7.7 FIBA R3-A7.8

FIBA R3-A7.9 FIBA R4-A19.1

FIBA R4-19.3.1 FIBA R3-A7.9

And they used to play in a cage made out of chicken wire (or something like that) but what does that have to do with who is in charge of the team today.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by just another ref

And they used to play in a cage made out of chicken wire (or something like that) but what does that have to do with who is in charge of the team today.

jar:

Its called precedent and historical context. I would really suggest that you read the rules that I referenced and you will see that the Team Captain does reign supreme.

In fact:

NFHS R3-S1-A2: The captain is the representative of his/her team and may address an official on matters of interpretation or to obtain essential information, if it is done in a courteous manner. Any player may address an official to request a time-out or permission to leave the court.

NCAA R3-S2-A1: The captain is a team member who may address an official on matters of interpretation or to obtain essential information, when it is done in a courteous manner. Dialogue between coaches and officials should be kept to a minimum.

One can see that Coaches are not considered the leaders per se of the team.


MTD, Sr.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

jar:

Its called precedent and historical context.

MTD, Sr.

no further questions

[Scrapper1]

Mark, "meadow muffins" is one of the many tame expletives that Col. Potter used on M*A*S*H. You translated it correctly.

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Its called precedent and historical context. I would really suggest that you read the rules that I referenced and you will see that the Team Captain does reign supreme.

And I would really suggest that you go to one team practice or game and you will see that your statement is utterly and completely false.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Mark, "meadow muffins" is one of the many tame expletives that Col. Potter used on M*A*S*H. You translated it correctly.


And I would really suggest that you go to one team practice or game and you will see that your statement is utterly and completely false.

Scrapper:

Now that you mention it, I do remember Col. Potter using the term along with "horse hockey."

I really do not care what happens in a team's practice, only what happens during a game. AND during my games the Team Captain is in charge. Case in point:

Daryl Long and I were officiating a boy's 7th/8th grade doubleheader just this past December. Late (less than 60 seconds to play; OhioHSAA uses 6 minute quarters for jr. H.S. games) in the 3rd quarter of the 7th grade game HC-V took exception to my officiating and committed an act of unsportsmanlike conduct and I charged him with the appropriate TF. Daryl came over and informed him that he had lost the use of the Coaching Box for the remainder of the game. HC-V thought Daryl didn't mean it when he told him that he had lost his right to use the CB because he remained standing for the remainder of the 3rd quarter; Daryl even reminded him when he was the T and Team V had the ball in their front court before the end of the 3rd quarter. Less than a minute into the 4th quarter A1 went to the line to shoot 2 FT's and HC-V was still standing. As the T for the upcoming FT's I instructed Captain-V to go over to his coach and instruct him to sit down because he had lost the use of the CB; Captain-V went over to HC-V and told him he had to sit down. HC-V did not sit down. We shot the free throws (which A1 made) and Team V headed up the court with the ball. HC-V remained standing the entire time. At this point the ball went out-of-bounds in front of HC-V and Daryl reminded him that he need to sit down. HC-V wanted to know why. Daryl reminded him that he (Daryl that is) had told him when he (HC-V) received his TF that he had to sit down. HC-V's response was that he doesn't listen to what officials say to him when he is coaching because he has more important things to do. Daryl then reminded him that I (meaning MTD, Sr.) had even sent his Captian to instruct to sit down and he still hadn't sat down. HC-V response to Daryl was: "My captain doesn't tell me what to do." WHACK!! (By Daryl.) HC-V disqualified and ejected (now Daryl has to write a game report).

Long story short (ROFLMAO; me tell a short story) is that HC-V's penalty from the state was an automatic 2 game suspension. Since the team had only one more regular season game to play before their league had its post-season tournament, the school fired HC-V. If only HC-V had listened to his Team Captain, he would still have a coaching job.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. If officials knew and understood precedent and the historical context of the rules, I wouldn't have to write such long dissertions to state the obvious. I really don't think you read any of the rules references I gave nor did you give much weight to how little power that HC has really had per the rules. Re-read my post about the game in the late 1930's and early 1940's, that is the historical context which lays out how the Rules Committee views the Team Captains and the Head Coach. I would suggest that you start using the Team Captains to your advantage. Remind them in the pre-game conference they are in charge of their teams. Remind them that you expect them to break the huddle on the first horn and they are not to wait until their HC decides he is done giving them a 75 second dissertation during a 30 second timeout. You will be suprised how much influence a Team Captain can have over an Head Howler Monkey (oops, I meant a Head Coach).

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

HC-V took exception to my officiating and committed an act of unsportsmanlike conduct and I charged him with the appropriate TF.

And did you give the Captain an indirect technical foul for failing to control his bench? No? Then it's "obvious" that the head coach is in charge of the bench and not the Captain. I can't even believe that you're trying to make such a ridiculous point, Mark. It's not even plausible, let alone true.

More importantly, wtf took you so long to toss the stupid coach? I'm surprised you didn't send him an engraved invitation to use the bench.

[JoeTheRef]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

And did you give the Captain an indirect technical foul for failing to control his bench? No? Then it's "obvious" that the head coach is in charge of the bench and not the Captain. I can't even believe that you're trying to make such a ridiculous point, Mark. It's not even plausible, let alone true.

More importantly, wtf took you so long to toss the stupid coach? I'm surprised you didn't send him an engraved invitation to use the bench.

I've been reading all day and weekend due to the fact that I've been on the court all weekend long and just to tired to post, but Scrap took the words right out of my mouth...what took you and your partner so long to toss the coach? I don't know Daryl Long, but he must be a well respected official for you to call him by name, so seriously, what took you guys so long?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JoeTheRef

I've been reading all day and weekend due to the fact that I've been on the court all weekend long and just to tired to post, but Scrap took the words right out of my mouth...what took you and your partner so long to toss the coach? I don't know Daryl Long, but he must be a well respected official for you to call him by name, so seriously, what took you guys so long?

"Daryl Long" is how MTD refers to his long time regular partner. Presumably because it's his partner's name; but I can't vouch for the veracity of that.

There is a person who posts here by that name, and claims to work with MTD; lending some credence to the theory that MTD is telling the truth.

I was also wondering what took them so long; but it may have just seemed like an eternity because of how long it took to read the story.