Good officiating?
 

In another thread we got talking about how often coaches comment about "poor officiating." So here's my question: What do coaches truly consider to be good officiating?

Besides when every call goes their way, which is a given.

This comes down to whether or not the coach is a reasonable person. I have had coaches say that they thought me and my crew had a tough game (read not to good) and they had examples why they thought that, and I respected that and listened and if necessary implement something. And I have had coaches said we had a great game and offered a reason why.

In either case I appreciate the feedback. However if a coach just says "you did a good job" and walks away, all I do is respond with a thank you, but I dont take it seriously. Why? Because if he said "you did a bad job" and walked away I would say thank you as well and not take it seriously. If I want to accept the praise then I have to accept the criticism, and in these cases I dont want either.

Ive been complimented by coaches....

One game sticks out... it was a very physical game and the coaches were complaining alot... the problem I was having is that yes.. alot of the kids were falling down but most of it was on thier own.. but.. there were a few calls that could have been made that maybe were not...

I said to my partner at half time "lets tighten this up".

I set the tone right away the second half and the rest went smoothly. The kids stopped flopping on thier own too.

After the game the coach thanked me for taking control.

I know that I should have done that in the first half to begin with.. a rookie mistake that I'm still rectifying, but... at least it was a compliment.

Also have been complimented for my hustle. :D

Well, trying to always think positive, I'm going to believe that a "good job" comment means just that, then forget about it and move on....
After about 25 yrs of playing mens softball, and 8 yrs of coaching sons in basketball, I never told the official "good job" if I didnt mean it. When I felt the official wasnt on top of his game, so to speak, I didnt say anything to him at game end. But I see your point.
Back to the OP? Each coach is different in; background, experience, age, team ability, their record, his bb job pressure, so--this question is unanswerable...

As a coach, I'm looking for two things from the officials....a strong knowledge of the rules (unfortunately, brother and sister officials, this one is lacking far too often) and Consistency.

I understand, as an official, that there are many shades of gray in officiating basketball, and all I try for as an official is to be consistent from the tip to the final horn and that's all I ask for from the officials who call the games I coach in.

When the coach of the losing team comes up to me, or me and my partner and says "good game" or "you guys did a good job", that always means a litle bit more to me than hearing it from than the winning coach. I usually just say "thank you."

That one is the toughest for me as an offical to understand. Just because I call an charge on one end does it mean I have to call a charge on the other end to be consistant?

What does consistant mean to you?

It means call things against their opponent and do not call anything against my team. ;)

Peace

IMO, if coaches knew half the rules of the game, then they would realize that the officials know more than they think we know.

My excperience is that coaches think you're a good official when you communicate with them and explain.
I once called a game in wich we had the dreaded Blarge (I was trail with the charge and L had the block).
I was 100% sure of it and he didn't have the best angle so we went with my call. Coach said
"but how did she manage to get both feet on the floor to draw a charge?"
Me: "she doesn't have to"
"coach":...
me:" I'll explain it to you after the game ok?"
He was fine with that, after the game I explained the principle of maintaining a legal gaurding position to him and the fact that a player doesn't even need one foot on the floor in order to take a charge.
My evaluator (who apperently was a friend of the coach) just smiled when I told him...
That coach liked me and I liked to call his game becuse we came along.
The coaches I don't like and the ones that don't like me are usually the ones who either have a bad day (or if I have a bad day) or the ones that arn't intrested in getting along.

But then there are offcourse other aspects, but I think communication is often underestimated...

One of the best pre-games I ever sat in was during my first year officiating. We had finished up the JV game and the varsity guys were in the locker room going over pre-game stuff. One was a veteran official and the other a newly promoted varsity guy who was very eager. He nodded his head at everything the veteran was saying and finally wrapped up the meeting by saying "And let's be consistent!"

The veteran paused for a moment, looked his partner in the eyes, and said "No, let's be right. If we're consistently wrong we're not getting out of here alive!"

I am reminded of a quote from True Grit. When asked if he needed a good lawyer, Ned Pepper (Robert Duvall) replied, "I need a good judge." A good judge, in this case, meant one who would let him stay alive. Too many coaches, if their team is not alive, equate this to bad officiating. Coaches, and others, see officials as nothing more than the bearers of bad news. There are exceptions, but with many coaches this overriding "the ref is a bad guy" mentality is further clouded by marginal rule knowledge and an obvious lack of objectivity on individual calls. How do we expect to be perceived as good, when viewed through such a hindrance of the clear picture?

True Grit ...
 

"Fill your hands, you son of a b*t*h."

http://re3.yt-thm-a02.yimg.com/image/25/m4/2966299438

I hear you loud and clear concerning consistency, but there is something you and all other coaches should realize. Stop worrying about the foul count 3 minutes into the game! If a coach feels like the fouls were lopsided at least wait until nature can take its course. There have been so many times when play has dictated a cluster of fouls for one team and a cluster for the other team later on. The end result is fouls that aren't even but reflect the defensive play of both teams. This should be our goal anyway: a foul count in line with how the teams played defense. Getting uptight about the foul count in the first 4 minutes is dumb.

If you want to know how you did, just ask the coach that just won.

I would take that a step further. Many officials do not care what coaches think about foul counts at any time of the game. I mainly concern myself with foul counts to know if we are close to a bonus situation. Outside of that if a coach complains, it is not going to change anything. Actually, most complaining coaches engage in means little or nothing but takes away their credibility.

IMO When the players play consistently, the officials have a much better chance at calling the game consistently. The inverse of this is also true.:cool:

Just to add to this point, let me relay something I was told by a D1 official several years ago:

D1 coaches, for the most part, are control freaks. They have control of a multi-million dollar budget, control of a large arena and practice facility, and control of the lives of those 12 or so kids playing for them. About the only thing they don't have control of is those three guys running around their court in striped shirts. This drives them crazy and they are willing to go to almost any length to try to gain control to their advantage.

When you look at it from that angle, it's no wonder that D1 coaches think the officiating is uniformally bad across the board.

BITS,

I know that this doesn't apply to all coaches but I'll say it anyway. Coaches aren't the best judges of officials during their own specific game. They just can't be objective and they can't separate their own bias toward/against their team. A foul against their team becomes "we teach them to block out". A travel aganst their team becomes "we teach that move". A missed layup becomes "if things weren't so physical, she would have made that". It's almost like a call goes against their ability to coach.

If they are watching a game not involving their team, they have a little more insight than a fan. Other than that, there is nothing in their background that makes them qualified to even rate an official.

With that being said, we have a very successful experience with coaches becoming officials after they tire of coaching. They do understand the game.

Mulk

Complaining about the foul count is about as sure a way as any to get me to tune a coach out. It's a "crying wolf" scenario. Same as the coach who never really says anything across the line, but always wants a travel, or 3 seconds, or "watch the handchecking" every other trip down the court. It eliminates that coach's ability to get my attention to question something legitimately.

I had a freshman level game a couple weeks ago where I was trail for free throws and the coach wanted to complain because his team had 3 fouls and the other team had none 2:30 into the game. I just leaned over and said, "Coach, I'll be happy to talk to you about legitimate questions or rules applications when I can, but if you want to talk about the foul count I'm pretty good at tuning that out and it's hard to get my attention back."

It worked in that game. I normally wouldn't have said anything, but it got that coach focused on the game, and he had just 2 or 3 "complaints" the rest of the night, all of which came with pretty good questions we could answer.

This is an interesting topic. It is good to hear things from a coach's perspective. I fall into the category of officials that doesn't really put much stock into comments from coaches. If they say, "nice job" I say "thank you." I'm more concerned with the other officials I work with and the assignors I work for thinking I do a quality job.

I'm not ever worried about foul count. Foul count is a direct representation of style of play...For example if one team is playing a man-to-man full court trapping game while the other team is playing a passive 2-3 zone, then the team pressing is probably going to commit far more fouls. My experience is that foul counts are almost always representative of the type of game. If the game is tight foul count is usually close, and if it isn't, it never is the fault of the game officials.

What I'm talking about with consistency is if you start the game calling hand-checking closely then you better continue to call the same type of hand-checks throughout the game. If you start the game by letting a lot of contact go then don't come up with a touch foul late.

The players will adjust to the way the game is being called, so therefore it is vital (and I'm saying this as a coach and an official) that the officials call apply the rules in a consistent manner.

Good Point ...
 

Good point. New officials, please take note. This allows the officials to be extra careful about correctly identifying the shooter. It also helps avoid the dreadful: "Blue ball". Blue throws in. Horn sounds. Table makes a one and one sign. We look like idiots. Good way to prevent many correctable errors.

Besides that? Nothing. Nuff said.

Which one are you?

http://www.streetswing.com/histmain/histitl/1snf1.jpg

Good One ...
 

Mark Padgett: Good one. Maybe your best of the week. I'm sure glad that the writer's strike is finally over, and we can now get your best material fresh on the Forum, instead of those terrible reruns.

Hey, hey, hey - what was so terrible about Rerun?

http://profootballtalk.com/Rerun.jpg

Please Stop ...
 

Please stop it. You're killing me. I may end up like this guy:

http://re3.yt-thm-a04.yimg.com/image/25/m8/4037784329