More thoughts from John Adams

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

2) he was saying "use the players to help you evaluate your officiating and what you need to work on."

If that's what he was saying, then I couldn't disagree more. Players know jack about the rules and officiating. I would NEVER consider a player's reaction to be useful in evaluating what I need to work on.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

If that's what he was saying, then I couldn't disagree more. Players know jack about the rules and officiating. I would NEVER consider a player's reaction to be useful in evaluating what I need to work on.

Coaches as well. I usually figure I'm doing a good job if both coaches are pissed off at me.

[CoachP]

Originally Posted by fiasco

Coaches as well. I usually figure I'm doing a good job if both coaches are pissed off at me.

Hey now, I got a 92 and a half!!!

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

If that's what he was saying, then I couldn't disagree more. Players know jack about the rules and officiating. I would NEVER consider a player's reaction to be useful in evaluating what I need to work on.

True, I wouldn't use a player's reaction as the lead item in the teaching syllabus. But it is useful information, in that I can look back over that play and evaluate why I probably missed that call. Maybe I was lazy in a rotation; maybe I guessed at contact instead of actually seeing the contact; maybe I was looking somewhere I should not have been looking?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

If that's what he was saying, then I couldn't disagree more. Players know jack about the rules and officiating. I would NEVER consider a player's reaction to be useful in evaluating what I need to work on.

Never say never and never say always.

How about the reaction of the offended player? Ever call a foul and then notice that the offended player is surprised to be going to the free throw line? or he chuckles and pats the defender on the butt b/c he knows he just got a freebie?