Automatic T?

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

BTW - if there was an "automatic T", it would absolutely be for a player or coach getting in the official's face and yelling "F you!" (without the abbreviation) If there's anyone out there who can think of a legitimate circumstance in which you wouldn't call that, I'd sure like to hear it.

A rather spirited "negotiation" with the very attractive female head coach about how she intends to pay for her foul insurance?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by mbyron

2 scenariosa) Kid gets called for a foul, he's obviously unhappy with the call, slams ball down, it bounces 15 feet high, he walks away. This earns a T from me.(b) Close game, kid gets called for a foul, he knows he committed a dumb foul, he says "C'mon Smith!" (which is his name), he slams the ball down harder than he means to, he gets this "uh oh" look on his face, retrieves the ball and hands it to me. Probably no T here from me.I suspect that (a) happens far more often than (b), but I agree with the general principle that technical fouls are almost never "automatic" but sometimes obvious and easy to call.

This sounds a lot like like a common sense. How dare you bring common sense into a discussion about NFHS basketball rules.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Oh yeah? There was this one time it happened just like that but I didn't give the T because it was a close game, it was that team's star player and he already had four fouls and I didn't want to cost him a D1 scholarship. I made that up, but we all know there are some coaches, and a ton of parents, who think those are valid reasons not to give the T.

Coaches. Parents. You forgot officials.

[derwil]

The above situation happen once to me (player slamming and commenting on my call). Only reason he didn't get a T is that I dropped the whistle out of my mouth and couldn't find the stupid thing. It had flopped over my shoulder and after the 5 seconds it took me to find it, the time for the T had passed......lucky punk.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

Had this happen for the first time yesterday. Player B1 steals the ball from A1 but is called for a foul on the play. B1 slams the ball on the floor and it bounces about 15 feet in the air. No technical foul called. That was a first for me. I know there's no such thing as an Automatic T, but isn't that about as automatic as it gets? Never seen one not called in that situation. I asked the ref, "I thought that was an automatic T?", and just got a dirty look in return.

If the ball comes back down and hits the floor it is an automatic TF, .
Don't you just love the Theory of Gravity, .

MTD, Sr.

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by mbyron

2 scenarios:

(a) Kid gets called for a foul, he's obviously unhappy with the call, slams ball down, it bounces 15 feet high, he walks away. This earns a T from me.

(b) Close game, kid gets called for a foul, he knows he committed a dumb foul, he says "C'mon Smith!" (which is his name), he slams the ball down harder than he means to, he gets this "uh oh" look on his face, retrieves the ball and hands it to me. Probably no T here from me.

I suspect that (a) happens far more often than (b), but I agree with the general principle that technical fouls are almost never "automatic" but sometimes obvious and easy to call.

That is what I was trying to explain is that it was (a) in my case, and I've always seen a T called in that situation. But, there may have been mitigating circumstances that I was not privy to. I didn't push it. Made my comment, got my dirty look, and moved on.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

That is what I was trying to explain is that it was (a) in my case, and I've always seen a T called in that situation. But, there may have been mitigating circumstances that I was not privy to. I didn't push it. Made my comment, got my dirty look, and moved on.

If only I could learn to do this with my wife....

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

That is what I was trying to explain is that it was (a) in my case, and I've always seen a T called in that situation.

Well you did not always see a T, because it did not happen in this case.

Peace

[doubleringer]

I'm getting in on this late, but I agree with everyone here that there is no such thing as an "automatic" call. Sure, the OP sounds like something that would warrant a T from most of us, but we weren't on the game. It sounds like you did the right thing in letting it go after one comment. Hopefully you also used it as an example to teach your players that it was an inappropriate action on the floor.

The post reminded me of a lower level coach I used to love working with. I bet he saved his players 5 or more technicals in the few years I worked his teams. His players would begin to do something unsporting, complaining or the like, and before I could get the whislte in my mouth, he'd be yelling at them and have a sub at the bench. If the coach is taking care of it, especially at the lower levels, I'm happy to let them.

[icallfouls]

Official threw a flag on UW player for tossing a ball behind his head and up into the air. The end result, UW missed the 35 yd PAT and the official was killed by ESPN. The PAC 10 assignor had to come out and say it was AUTOMATIC.

Automatic calls are the bane of the game. They are a result of fanboys, coaches, and media who video every play and break them down. Then they get out their rulebooks and make interpretations for the officials about the calls that were or were not made. The result is due to pressure we are asked to call certain AUTOMATICs that are handed out during the season or in the next season.

It is required that the context of the game be considered when calling a game.

More and more we are being asked to call the game in black and white, when basketball is more gray. The use of automatics will result in a game that is played at the FT line. Its bad enough that the bigs are being taken out of the game and that the emphasis is on guard play.

Please people, let common sense prevail, don't take the spontaneity of the game away from this great game.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

Official threw a flag on UW player for tossing a ball behind his head and up into the air. The end result, UW missed the 35 yd PAT and the official was killed by ESPN. The PAC 10 assignor had to come out and say it was AUTOMATIC.

Automatic calls are the bane of the game. They are a result of fanboys, coaches, and media who video every play and break them down. Then they get out their rulebooks and make interpretations for the officials about the calls that were or were not made. The result is due to pressure we are asked to call certain AUTOMATICs that are handed out during the season or in the next season.

It is required that the context of the game be considered when calling a game.

Please people, let common sense prevail, don't take the spontaneity of the game away from this great game.

Two thoughts on that call. First the call at UW was an easy call for the officials to make. Football rules prohibit throwing the ball high in the air it went high in the air.
Second, ESPN was dishonest in their coverage of the play. For the day of the game they used a tight angle shot to make it look like he just tossed the ball behind him. That should be the first thing discussed when you mention ESPN attacking a call that was clearly right.

If a player steps out of bounds, that's an automatic call. Game situation doesn't enter in. If a player calls a timeout with none left, be he in Michigan Gold or not it's a technical. If a player tells you that you're lying to him loud enough for the crowd to hear, you get to practice your Technical mechanics. I take no position on the ongoing thread, but your comments could easily lead someone to think that they should lay off a call late in the game even when the rules call for it.
________
The Cliff Condos Pattaya

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

Official threw a flag on UW player for tossing a ball behind his head and up into the air. The end result, UW missed the 35 yd PAT and the official was killed by ESPN. The PAC 10 assignor had to come out and say it was AUTOMATIC.

To be fair, that play was an obvious violation of the rules. And there are specific rules in place to make this very specific action illegal in a NCAA Football game. And the NCAA used video to show what constituted a foul. The officials were not only applying the rule, they were applying the philosophy.

Bouncing the ball to my knowledge has never been endorsed as a Technical foul either by rules or interpretation that I have ever seen. All there is are some official's personal standards that have been passed on. This is the very reason I suggested earlier that is the action more egregious if the action takes place based on how high the ball goes.

Peace

[stripes2255]

Back to Coach Bills concerns: I am not sure why you would be concerned with the event anyways. This seemed like a situation between your opponent and the ref. Rather than worrying about this situation, worry about your team getting better and use the event as a learning situation for what you don't want to see from your squad.

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by stripes2255

Back to Coach Bills concerns: I am not sure why you would be concerned with the event anyways. This seemed like a situation between your opponent and the ref. Rather than worrying about this situation, worry about your team getting better and use the event as a learning situation for what you don't want to see from your squad.

Wasn't too concerned. Like I said, I didn't make a big deal of it. Just thought it was unusual. I've been coaching a long time, and it's been a T every time, except this one.

And, how was this a learning situation?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by stripes2255

Back to Coach Bills concerns: I am not sure why you would be concerned with the event anyways. This seemed like a situation between your opponent and the ref. Rather than worrying about this situation, worry about your team getting better and use the event as a learning situation for what you don't want to see from your squad.

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

Wasn't too concerned. Like I said, I didn't make a big deal of it. Just thought it was unusual. I've been coaching a long time, and it's been a T every time, except this one.

And, how was this a learning situation?

This is the reason these usually need to be called. From how I read it, I would have called it. It's hard for Coach Bill to teach his kids there are consequences for mouthing off to the refs (or in this case, showing them up) when it's done by the opponents without consequence.