My first ejection!
 

Girls Jr High game this morning. Game has been pretty chippy throughout, but starts getting really bad when, in the 3rd quarter, my partner calls a T on H1 for trying to knee a girl as she ran by.

My partner reports very quickly, but I know things are getting out of hand, so I go to the table and call the coaches over to explain to them that the chippy play has got to stop and to please reign in their players. H coach just blows up, saying the T was completely unjustified and we're "screwing" his team. Whack! "That's enough coach."

Well, that only sets him off more, so I hurry and report the T and try and get the heck out of dodge. I can't get two steps away from the table when he screams "You both are full of crap and everybody in this gym knows it."

Whack! Bye bye, coach. He tries to protest and on and on, and my partner lets him know that he has thirty seconds to begin exiting the gym, otherwise we're going to call forfeit.

What a fun time. I had to call another technical on his daughter later in the game for telling me I'm "full of crap." Runs in the family, I guess. :)

Sticking a knee out is T? Have to be quite a non-contact, usportsmanlike act to pick one up like that...

Why get the coaches together here? Either they get the stop sign and get whacked onr they dont. Getting them together does not work most of the time in a situation like this...

Penalize the chippiness here. Based on the descrinption the coach may have been right that the T was unjustified ...

Try and learn from this... better ways to manage

How do you try to knee someone as they run by? :confused:

Um. You bring your knee up towards their body in an attempt to make contact.

Not sure how else to explain that.

She didn't just "stick her knee out." She brought it up in attempt to strike the other girl but stopped short before she did. Plus, the look on her face spoke volumes.

Thats a tuff one. I might have called intentional foul at that point based on the type of rough play you describe going on all game. From letting them play all game to a T on a particular play may have incited coach a bit. Especially if you had a close game.

Forgot to mention that I had already called an intentional foul on white earlier in the quarter.

Either way, I'm not sure an intentional foul covers this type of act, does it?

You mean on the same player? If not, it doesn't matter how many you call in a game. If you call enough of them on that same player, she's going to foul out soon.

Not an option - an official can't call an intentional foul without contact.

No, different player.

During the course of the game, white had two different players called for technical fouls, one player called for an intentional foul and the coach ejected for two direct technicals.

And, even though it was a close game throughout, they still won.

Ha! Good question.
I had never seen it until a GV Thursday night.
In a mess under the basket, A1 grabbed a rebound [in front] and tried to dribble to the other side of the basket. B1 lifted her knee above the waist to impede. Quite strange.
But all I had was a block.:)

I agree with Kelvin. This was the problem. Just call the game. If you have hard contact, call the intentional. If you have more unsporting stuff, toss somebody.

This kind of conference in an already heated situation is rarely a beneficial thing, IMO.

I have to say it's your fault the Coach was tossed. No good comes out getting Coach 's together. Call your game that in and of itself will reign in the players. Soon enough foul trouble will get rid of the trouble makers. Had you not added fuel to the fire the first tee would never had been called. I understand what you were trying to do and what your intentions were. However, keep in mind "no good deed goes unpunished".:D

This may very well be the case in this situation, but this statement is totally false. Getting the coaches together is a tool that when used properly can work for the good.

While I agree, Tommy -- I think that your statement is inconsistent with your comment to MTD in his "T" thread about talking to the coach after a T.

That is, both can be a good tool when used by the right official at the right time to the right coach(es), but neither should be the first tool put into the tool belt by an inexperienced official.

When in doubt, don't initiate conversation with the coach.

Agreed, In this case if I'm reading correctly, identify the 'troublemaker' and her fouls will take care of themselves.

I never intiate conversations with coaches unless it's necesssary.

As officials we are in charge and should be in control of the game.

I must have put fiasco on my ignore list a long time ago and forgotten about it. I guess I'll never hear the full story behind his first erection.

Rather than getting the coaches together, would you consider briefly getting the captains together?

Bob, it isn't inconsistent at all. In this thread I'm saying there is a situation where getting coaches (plural) together can help. Notice I'm not giving any specific situations when I would do this because there are too many variables.
In MTD's thread I said it isn't a good idea to stick around after giving a coach a T. In high school we say give a coach a T and get away. In college we say give a coach a T and get away. I have always been a firm believer in giving a coach two Ts if it is personal and he/she leaves you no choice. However, under normal circumstances I will not be the one to stick around and tell a coach he must remain seated for the duration of the game. I will leave that to one of my partners. Now where in that situation does the other coach come into play?

Are there any circumstances where you would bring the coaches together?

Do you normally give a coach a T, stay in place and tell the coach he must remain seated for the rest of the game or does one of your partners do this?

In this case, I would appreciate it if you would answer those questions without being vague and/or non-committal?

I guess, by and large, no officials talk to coaches unless it's necessary.
But never? That's a very long time.
And necessary? What is and what ain't necessary may just vary a might depending on the user.

I think the "never" applies to "initiating" the conversation; not simply talking to a coach.

I think that, too.
I have initiated quite a few conversations which probably were not necessary. I did it to eliminate future technical fouls, mostly.

Had a game earlier in year where my partner and I called called both team players together during a free throw admin, telling them that "we/re not a playing a rugby match here, this is basketball". And if it didn't stop, intentional and T's would be called". It worked, had a smooth game afterwards. Coaches didn't say a word either!! Point here is that we avoided confronting the coaches first, had our little pep talk not worked, then we go to coaches. This is a good example in controlling play before it gets out of hand.

Works For Me ...
 

We did the same thing yesterday. Boys prep school varsity. A1 fouls B1, causing both to fall to the floor. A1 throws ball at B1. B1 is held back by a teammate. Common foul and technical foul on A1, tough call, but we decided not flagrant. After the technical fouls shots, ball is put back into play. My partner and I note that the players are getting a little rough, so we pretty much did what rngrck did. It worked. No more problems for the rest of the game.

There is a common theme here, folks. You do whatever you need to to do to prevent situations, either physical or verbal, from escalating beyond where your line is. People's lines and techniques can differ. Whatever works, do it. You can T people, call personal fouls on minimal contact, warn them, counsel them...options are endless. In the original posting, sounds like nothing got de-escalated to me, and that's too bad. Hopefully he'll try a different approach next time.

Sorry this just doesn't wash. 1) Refs are not responsible for whether kids stay in control or not. We do try to prevent problems as much as we can, and we must certainly never do things that might inflame a situation, but the responsibility for actual control lies with the players and the coaches. 2) We cannot just do whatever we want to try to "get control". We can't eject people who haven't actually broken rules. We can't call fouls if they weren't committed. We can't make players sit down, just to calm them down, or send a message. 3) Refs must first of all observe everything that happens, secondly enforce the rules as written, and thirdly manage the game withing the limits of our authority.

I agree that the OP needs to learn some different game management tools, but de-escalating was never his responsibility. His ONLY job is to enforce the rules, and to be sure he's not contributing to any escalation that happens.

Or his last one.....

Snuck one in, didn't ya?

A j, an r, what's the difference. We're all friends here.

What tools would you suggest, then?

The first half was called rather tightly. We were calling jump balls incredibly quickly beginning early on because things were getting physical.

Both my partner and I, on seperate occasions in the second quarter, talked with members of each team about the chippy play.

Then, the intentional foul was called. I figured that would wake everyone up.

The technical foul before the conference was the last straw for me, which is why I called coaches together.

Tightening up the foul calls did no good. Talking to the players did no good. Calling an intentional foul did no good.

I'd love to hear your suggestion, rainmaker, on what I should have done differently.

Yes. No.

I hope that helps, but since the questions are of a differetn form ("any" v. "normally"), I'm not sure it does.

To be clear, there are "ANY" circumstnaces where I'd brign the coaches together and where I'd talk to the coach after a T. "NORMALLY" I would do neither.

Mr. Jenkins, your reputation for not clearly taking a stand has once again been proven!
Bringing coaches together to discuss...whatever is totally different than talking to a coach immediately following a T. I don't know what your point was in saying I'm not consistent concerning the two. I think at this point it should be clear that you can be very wishy washy. Sort of like a...I don't want to say that because I know Juulie is a woman who can take a stand one way or another.

You may not want to say so, but if you have a good deal of experience you should know that bringing coaches together is useful in some situations and telling a coach he must be seated right after the same official just gave him/her a T is not the norm. I really didn't expect you to man-up and say it, but it was worth a shot.

As the girl "ran" by? :confused:

Yes. :confused:

Nice impassioned speech there. Where did I state that we can go around the rules to de-escalate a situation? I can lower my personal bar for what constitutes a foul if it helps keep the game in control. I can ask a coach or player to calm down emotionally or physcially. I can let them know the consequences for not doing so, and then penalize them. I can try and reason with them before calling a foul or a T. I can do all kinds of things.

You are correct, though. The ONLY job is to enforce the rules. That's the requirement. Based on what I read, I think they absolutely contributed to the escalation. Resolving conflict amicably is a big key to being a successful basketball official. It also helps in life, too! :D

Pleae explain how I could be any more clear than a simple "Yes" answer to one question and a simple "No" answer to the other.

I agree 100% with the penultimate statement above.

It's also, imo, 100% inconsistent to chastise someone (I've forgotten who by now) for making a statement about talking to the coach after a T without including a disclaimer to the effect that "it might not be suitable for younger or less experienced officials" and not including the same statement when the play is about bringing the coaches together to discuss rough play.

You feel like it is inconsistent simply because you are trying to find fault with something I'm saying right now. You are ignoring the fact that my statements were in response to someone saying it is useless, or something to that effect, to bring coaches together. I did not say when I would do it, when I have done it or any situation where it would be appropriate. I just said in certain situations it could be useful. On the other hand, MTD gave a specific incident where he T'd a coach and told him he must remain seated right after.

Like I said, you are trying to find fault with me right now for some reason and I don't really care why. It just wasn't the same kinds of situations so consistency shouldn't even be an issue.

BTW, you did give a straight forward answer then in your normal fashion backed off somewhat by worrying about the words "any" and "normally." It comes down to the fact that you really cannot disagree with what I'm saying so you make something up. Whatever.