Just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it "bad advice." I can see validity to both sides of this one.

Until last summer, I always called coaches "coach" regardless of whether or not I knew their names. At a camp this summer, Scott Twardoski was speaking (he refs a few D-1 men's conferences including the Pac-10 and he refs WNBA as well) and he said that he used to feel that way too. Then an NBA ref that he respects highly told him that saying "coach" is an excuse to be lazy and not learn the names of each coach.

Since then, I have made it a point to find out the names of every coach that I officiate and address them by first name in games. I think that dealing with coaches has always been a strength for me (maybe my only one - :) ). Calling them by their first name has enhanced that relationship even more.

Just my own experience!

It is not advice, it is what I do.

I also do not have very good friends that are coaches, so I do not worry about what they may or may not think.

I will say this, if they call me by my first name, I have no problem calling them by their first name either. ;)

Peace

I prefer to be addressed as "Your Highness". :)

One of these days, I'll introduce myself as "El Conquistador."

Bad advice? Cause you don't think it's right?

Even if I have never met the coaches, I will know their names before meeting them and will address them by name the entire game. I also introduce myself to the coaches and captains as "Rich" and am thrilled if the coaches use my name.

Definitely a regional thing, but I'm willing to bet at the top levels of the game they use names all the time.

I agree with this. If I know both coaches, I'll use their names. If I am only familiar with one of them, I call both "Coach". I don't want a coach that I don't know to think that I'm chumming up to the other one. That's a sure-fire way to have problems later.

I guess the question is "why?" Why pretend that the three of us don't know each other, when I've been reffing games for both of them for 10 years? It just seems silly to me.

Jeez, this is just as silly as the other extreme. It's not lazy, it's respectful. Being overly-familiar with somebody you don't know is pushy.

What is the rationale for this difference? Why do you call the girls' coach by first name but not the boys' coach? :confused: I can't think of any reason for having a different approach between the two coaches.

Maybe he knows the girls coach better.

They know your history with meds..........

Put me in the one third of either way is fine. I can see where the official is calling the home coach "Brian" and the visitor coach, "Coach" being "funny looking" though.

We all hear our name better than we hear our role ("ref", "coach"). So, using the name can help us get the attention through the noise / distractions of the game.

Put me down on the side of using the name (on both sides).

I also try to remember the captain's names throughout the game.

Can you understand the kids when they mumble their names to you? I know half the time I can't, especially with some of the more exotic names. I do try to remember their numbers, though -- just in case I don't, I circle the speaking captain's number in the book.

And I do (maybe someone has a mechanics manual handy at the moment can verify whether this is still in there) verify before the toss that the captains are ready (speaking for their teams).

Usually not -- but I do remember the numbers and look at the line-up or listen to the introductions.

I do -- if the speaking captains for both teams are starting.

I figured you magically learn how to speak teenager once you have one. I have another decade or so to see if that's true personally, though. :D