Coach out of Box?

[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.

[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.

[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.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

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.

That official will see the head coach that's trying to call a TO from the opposing team's bench area though.

[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.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

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

In fairness to Z, I don't think it has anything to do with that. I think he was replying to my "screw the timeout request" comment.

IOW, I don't think he was saying that you shouldn't T the coach for being in the wrong box. He was merely saying that somebody should always be able to check for the request before it gets to the point where the coach is running into the backcourt.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

In fairness to Z, I don't think it has anything to do with that. I think he was replying to my "screw the timeout request" comment.

IOW, I don't think he was saying that you shouldn't T the coach for being in the wrong box. He was merely saying that somebody should always be able to check for the request before it gets to the point where the coach is running into the backcourt.

That was my point. It's irrelevant whether you shoulda, coulda, woulda. You have to deal with what actually happened. And what happened is that you've got a coach yelling at you from the OTHER team's bench area. Don't blame the officials if they can't get a TO request in situations like this because the situation has dictated that they can't turn away from the action.

[zebraman]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

That was my point. It's irrelevant whether you shoulda, coulda, woulda. You have to deal with what actually happened. And what happened is that you've got a coach yelling at you from the OTHER team's bench area. Don't blame the officials if they can't get a TO request in situations like this because the situation has dictated that they can't turn away from the action.

Really hard for me to deal with what actually happened when I hear these kinds of stories. With 3 officials on the floor, we should never miss a coach wanting a time-out, especially in a situation like this when we know one might be coming. There is always someone with enough peripheral that they can see the coach gesturing madly. If this happened at state, you'd have to call the T. And the entire crew should be expecting to work the consolation bracket for the rest of the tournament.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by zebraman

If this happened at state, you'd have to call the T. And the entire crew should be expecting to work the consolation bracket for the rest of the tournament.

With all due respect, that's boolsh!t! If they didn't call the "T", I might agree with it.

The officials were concentrating on the play. That's what they're supposed to be doing. If they miss a TO call out that was out of their vision, too bad. Having that happen occasionally is a byproduct of a rule that was never well thought out in the first place.

[Tio]

If you've already T'd the coach of the opposing team, then I think your hands have been tied. However, the action needs to be blatant and obvious on tape, without a shadow of a doubt. Sometimes I wonder if the actions of coaches described on this board are 100% accurate. :> I do not believe this was the scenario the original poster mentioned.

Second, I spend more time with the NCAA rules, but I believe an NFHS coach may stand to request a timeout once they have been belted. I may be wrong, so someone please correct me if so.

I am obviously in the minority on this board with my philosophy. I have found that the most successful officials are the ones who can accurately apply the rules. This includes realizing there are "gray" areas of the rulebook subject to interpretation. Great discussion though......

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Tio

If you've already T'd the coach of the opposing team, then I think your hands have been tied. However, the action needs to be blatant and obvious on tape, without a shadow of a doubt. Sometimes I wonder if the actions of coaches described on this board are 100% accurate. :> I do not believe this was the scenario the original poster mentioned.

Second, I spend more time with the NCAA rules, but I believe an NFHS coach may stand to request a timeout once they have been belted. I may be wrong, so someone please correct me if so.

I am obviously in the minority on this board with my philosophy. I have found that the most successful officials are the ones who can accurately apply the rules. This includes realizing there are "gray" areas of the rulebook subject to interpretation. Great discussion though......

I deal with both rule sets. In NFHS the coach may stand to request a T/O once seatbelted.

But my point is that we shouldn't have to put so many variables in play to make a decision. Say it was an NCAA game in which this occurred, would it matter if the coach in question had previously received a warning or T for being outside the coach's box?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Tio

However, the action needs to be blatant and obvious on tape, without a shadow of a doubt.

Tio, what could be more blatant and obvious on tape thas a head coach standing in the OTHER team's bench area?

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Tio, what could be more blatant and obvious on tape thas a head coach standing in the OTHER team's bench area?

Are going to discuss Eliot Spitzer again? No? OK.

The idea that T's have to be the very last resort - that the coach has to blatantly and obviously be misbehaving, that officials have to swallow hard and deal with it some other way without taking care of busines - that type of thinking was thrown out the window with the POE on bench decorum. BTW this has gotten so out of hand that people are even coming here to this forum to post that we need to have a damn good reason to take back to the assignor for T'ing an 8th grade kid. Can you imagine that?

This is nuts.

By approachable, don't be thin skinned, be professional (where have I heard that before?) but when you need to take care of business just do it. Because if you don't they will walk all over you.

In the OP I don't know how you calmly walk the coach away from his oppoenent's bench and back across the midline to his bench without T'ing him. I really don't. Do you think the OTHER coach (assuming he knows what he's doing) is going to let you get away with that? Talk about game management... now you're in a situation where you let coach A off without a T and you have to take all sorts of BS from coach B because of it.

yeah, good idea.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Tio

I do not believe this was the scenario the original poster mentioned.

Really? Based on what? Then why respond to it? I've found it's best to answer a scenario as if it is correct as described.