Coach out of Box?

[Tio]

I think we need to be aware at junctures of the game where teams/coaches may want a timeout. Usually, coaches start out reasonably and won't run out on the court unless their initial request isn't acknowledged. During the timeout, I would address timeout awareness with the crew. When we are bringing the teams out of the timeout, I would casually tell the coach something like, "Coach, I know you are trying hard to get our attention, but I really need you to stay in your box."

I think most coaches are just caught up in the intensity of the game and just need to be reminded to bring it down a notch.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Seriously though, if she's past half-court then it's gonna be very hard not to call a 'T'.

If she's in the OTHER coaching box, it's an automatic "T" imo. That's freaking ridiculous.

We spend way too much time making up excuses for ignoring over-the-top behavior like this. If you want to warn, then you had better be prepared to warn the other head coach when s/he comes into the far bench area to set his defense in the last minute. And if I was the other coach, you had damn well better believe that I'd be in the other coaching box at some time before the game ended.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Tio

I think we need to be aware at junctures of the game where teams/coaches may want a timeout.

Originally Posted by somebody on page 1 of the thread

I think the official who was consumed by the play should call a technical foul on his two partners for not being aware in a situation where a time-out should be expected.

Being aware is great, but the ballhandler was triple-teamed in the backcourt. That probably means that we have 10 players and so (hopefully) 3 officials in the backcourt. So which official exactly should turn his/her attention away from this high-intensity situation because they think the coach might want a timeout? Should it be the new Trail, who is responsible for the endline out of bounds call? Should it be the Center, who is helping with the contact (or, if the ball is on the C's side, has primary responsibility for the play)? Or should it be the new Lead who is responsible for 6 players who are scrambling to either get open or play deny defense?

The coach can request a timeout all he/she wants. The officials' first priority is to the play on the court. IF the play is such that the official can look away to verify the request, then he/she can grant it. But in a case like this, screw the timeout request. Officiate the freakin' play. If the coach has really been coaching, then the kids should know that they can request the timeout themselves.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by oldschool

How would you deal with this. Team A gets rebound in backcourt and is triple teamed against baseline. Is a sectional champioship game in double overtime. Coach of A comes all the way down sideline to get a time out. Is actually in the other teams coaching box. Understanding she was just trying to get a timeout but is this an acceptable practice? What would you do? 3 whistle crew so I know someone should have been watching for the timeout. Thanks

oldschool:


Here is how I would have handled the situation:

WHACK!! Coach do you still want a timeout?

MTD, Sr.

[Tio]

Ben Howland in the 2nd half of the recent UCLA/Stanford game came onto the court to call a timeout at the end of the game. He did not get T'd.

[rockyroad]

By rule, it's an easy T. I really don't care that all they wanted was a time-out, there is NO reason for the coach to be that far down the court...

Having said that, if there were 10 evaluators/observers at this game, 5 would probably tell you to call the T immediately and the other 5 would say it was "good game management" to not call the T...but imo, if we follow the rules, there really isn't much that the assignor or evaluators can ding us for. I can justify to everyone involved why I DID call the T based on the rules...I can't use any rules basis to justify why I did NOT call the T.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

I can justify to everyone involved why I DID call the T based on the rules...I can't use any rules basis to justify why I did NOT call the T.

You are wise beyond your height.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Being aware is great, but the ballhandler was triple-teamed in the backcourt. That probably means that we have 10 players and so (hopefully) 3 officials in the backcourt. So which official exactly should turn his/her attention away from this high-intensity situation because they think the coach might want a timeout? Should it be the new Trail, who is responsible for the endline out of bounds call? Should it be the Center, who is helping with the contact (or, if the ball is on the C's side, has primary responsibility for the play)? Or should it be the new Lead who is responsible for 6 players who are scrambling to either get open or play deny defense?

The coach can request a timeout all he/she wants. The officials' first priority is to the play on the court. IF the play is such that the official can look away to verify the request, then he/she can grant it. But in a case like this, screw the timeout request. Officiate the freakin' play. If the coach has really been coaching, then the kids should know that they can request the timeout themselves.

Very well stated. Stoopid rule.

From POE 3A in last year's FED rulebook...."Coaches attempting to call a timeout during playing action is a continuing problem. When player control is lost, officials must concentrate on playing action while attempting to determine if a timeout should be granted." The same rationale applies to this situation.

[zebraman]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Being aware is great, but the ballhandler was triple-teamed in the backcourt. That probably means that we have 10 players and so (hopefully) 3 officials in the backcourt. So which official exactly should turn his/her attention away from this high-intensity situation because they think the coach might want a timeout?

There is always an official facing the table. With awareness and peripheral vision, you can see a coach going F*$*ing crazy trying to call a time-out. Happens all the time.

[Tio]

In my opinion, a T in this situation does not fit the game. I've heard Dick Cartmell speak several times at camps and he always refers to technical fouls as: "Our last resort to manage a situation."

So my suggestion is to do the right thing for the game and not put a decision in the game that will get you in the paper for the wrong reasons.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by zebraman

There is always an official facing the table.

Absolutely FALSE!!! There is always an official on the side of the court opposite the table. But if the play is on the endline opposite the coach's bench, that "opposite" official is looking AWAY from the bench (particularly if the play is on his/her side of the court). This is a triple-team near the endline. There's no way that the "opposite" official can look at the bench without sacrificing coverage on the play.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Tio

In my opinion, a T in this situation does not fit the game. I've heard Dick Cartmell speak several times at camps and he always refers to technical fouls as: "Our last resort to manage a situation."

So my suggestion is to do the right thing for the game and not put a decision in the game that will get you in the paper for the wrong reasons.

So what would the right thing be if...

1) the opposing coach had received a 'T' for bench decorum infractions earlier in the game?
or
2) if the coach calling the TO had been seat-belted b/c of a bench technical in the 2nd quarter?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by zebraman

There is always an official facing the table. With awareness and peripheral vision, you can see a coach going F*$*ing crazy trying to call a time-out. Happens all the time.

What does that have to do with a coach being so far out of her box?

The coach was in the other team's bench area. Trying to make excuses for her behavior is simply ridiculous imo.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Tio

In my opinion, a T in this situation does not fit the game. I've heard Dick Cartmell speak several times at camps and he always refers to technical fouls as: "Our last resort to manage a situation."

So my suggestion is to do the right thing for the game and not put a decision in the game that will get you in the paper for the wrong reasons.

So if I don't call the T and the team whose coach was at the other end of the floor ends up winning, and the losing coach goes to the press to say "Hey. Check this out. We got cheated." - well then we just got in the papers for the wrong reason.

Like I said, I CAN justify calling the T if I need to...I CAN"T justify ignoring it if I need to...

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Tio

In my opinion, a T in this situation does not fit the game. I've heard Dick Cartmell speak several times at camps and he always refers to technical fouls as: "Our last resort to manage a situation."

So my suggestion is to do the right thing for the game and not put a decision in the game that will get you in the paper for the wrong reasons.

Dick Carmell would call a "T" in this situation. It's that obvious...and especially with the POE that the NCAA issued this year on coaches being out of their boxes. Unfortunately, other officials don't have his testicular fortitude. That's my opinion.

If you're trying to use the rationale that you shouldn't make any call because it might get you in the paper, you're in the wrong bidness. You call something...anything...strictly on merit. Period.