Angry Coach at Halftime

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by OHBBREF

the offical thinks it is intended for their benifit - and I do not doubt it. I just do not think that it is sufficient for you to T this coach up.
I do not disagree that it is a terrible thing that he does, I just do not think you have any jurisdiction over it once they go behind the closed doors of that locker room.

Rather than striving to come up with reasons not to penalize the coach for his terrible behavior, I would advocate that an official simply take action.

I'm continually amazed at the lengths to which people will go to avoid dealing with unsporting behavior. Why is there this unwillingness?

[CajunNewBlue]

This has been a very interesting series of posts.... as a father of a varsity basketball player, personally I think you should have immediately ejected him, in front of all his kids, while in the locker room... (IMHO, the locker room is NOT a sanctuary to do BAD things) and made sure that he earned at the very least a few games off to reflect on his coaching style (NFHS has zero tolerance for "bad language" as does the LHSAA)... Now, as a non-professional referee... i just dabble in the minors ... I would have whacked him... rule references be damned, as a "Coach, you know that just ain't right" should suffice... of course since he's already whacked, he's a dead man and I don't talk to dead men.
As a professional umpire "if there is such a thing...lol" I am amazed... no make that totally baffled...no, make that flabbergasted... that behavior like this is tolerated. Although "playing devils advocate here for lack of rule references" sometimes the rules don't allow/reference for such over the top, totally ridiculous behavior and good common sense must rule.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by OHBBREF

10.1.3
addresses the use of electronic media directly, and does not give the official authority in the dressing room w/o the use of electronic media occuring.

It is also another of those unenforcable rules - since without direct knowledge of the communication or review occuring, there is no way to determine that it has happened, unless you search the dressing room, and to the best of my knowledge you have no authority to do that.

You asked for an instance where we are shown to have authority in the locker room. There it is. I'd say the burden's on you to prove it's only for one infraction of the rules (use of electronic media).

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by CajunNewBlue

This has been a very interesting series of posts.... as a father of a varsity basketball player, personally I think you should have immediately ejected him, in front of all his kids, while in the locker room... (IMHO, the locker room is NOT a sanctuary to do BAD things) and made sure that he earned at the very least a few games off to reflect on his coaching style (NFHS has zero tolerance for "bad language" as does the LHSAA)... Now, as a non-professional referee... i just dabble in the minors ... I would have whacked him... rule references be damned, as a "Coach, you know that just ain't right" should suffice... of course since he's already whacked, he's a dead man and I don't talk to dead men.
As a professional umpire "if there is such a thing...lol" I am amazed... no make that totally baffled...no, make that flabbergasted... that behavior like this is tolerated. Although "playing devils advocate here for lack of rule references" sometimes the rules don't allow/reference for such over the top, totally ridiculous behavior and good common sense must rule.

[OHBBREF]

the reference is for rule 10 section 1 article 3
which specificall covers only the use of electronic media for coaching communicating with players -

Rule 10 Fouls and Penalties
SECTION 1 TEAM TECHNICAL
A team shall not:
ART. 3 . . . Use television monitoring or replay equipment or computers (other than for statistics) for coaching purposes during the game or any intermission or use a megaphone or any mechanical sounding device or any electronic transmission device at courtside for coaching purposes, or electronic equipment for voice communication with players.

where does this give you blanket authority over the lockerroom?

Cajun
I see what you are saying and yes common sense says whack them - however there is nothing in the rules that says you have the authority to do so.
That is the issue, find a way to deal with it.

But you can not tell me you are going to whack a coach if he mouths off and cusses in his locker room during his pre game speech to his team, or he says these three officials are going to homer us - it happens everytime we come here, after the referee's authority begins at the fifteen minute mark and you happen to be in the locker room and over hear it.

So if you accept the 10.1.3 case play as your authority - then you have to act here in the same manner - and in 25 years at upper levels I have never heard of a game or a half starting with a T because of a speech eminating from a locker room.

Since I figure that the odds are that neither of us will convince the others of our correctness I will take the lead and get some rules interpreters opinions as well as try to get rules editors to respond also. It may take a week or more to get the appropriate answers.

[Adam]

Tell me where it says our authority stops on the court? There is nothing anywhere that suggests the media rule is an exception to some policy stopping our jurisdiction at the closed doors of the locker room.

In all those years of "upper levels," how many times have you heard of such a speech being heard by the officials?

BTW, I'm not arguing a T is the best call here; I'll leave that to Nevada. I will argue, however, that you have solid rules backing for it.

Again, where does it say your jurisdiction stops at the door?

ART.2...The official's jurisdiction, prior to the game, begins when they arrive on the floor. The official's arrival on the floor shall be at least 15 minutes before the scheduled starting time of the game.

ART.3...The official's jurisdiction extends through periods when the game may be momentarily stopped for any reason.

ART.4...The jurisdiction of the officials' is terminated and the final score has been approved when all officials leave the visual confines of the playing area.

ART.1...Penalize unsporting conduct by any player, coach, substitute, team attendant or follower.

[OHBBREF]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Tell me where it says our authority stops on the court? There is nothing anywhere that suggests the media rule is an exception to some policy stopping our jurisdiction at the closed doors of the locker room.

I have nothing that allows us specifically in the locker room.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

In all those years of "upper levels," how many times have you heard of such a speech being heard by the officials?

Actually quite a few times, I have been in officals locker rooms that are next to team rooms and heard people and officials get called several wonderful expletives, players and other teams called things that are inappropriate, and once I was getting dressed for my game and heard the visiting coach outside the locker room speaking about how bad the JV officals were while they were in the locker room. it comes up maybe not this blatant but I would say that this comes up once or twice a year.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Again, where does it say your jurisdiction stops at the door?

I am going from the opposite angle - where do we get the authority.
I am interested in some official response.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by OHBBREF

I have nothing that allows us specifically in the locker room.

You don't have to go into the locker room any more than you have to go into the huddle. it's not like we've got the place wired.

To go back to your legalese, if a cop smells marijuana coming from the car, probable cause has been given. If I hear him directly calling me a cheat using expletives in the process, I may have to call the T.

You've got a direct case play indicating that the coach is not immune from the rules even in the confines of his closed locker room. There is nothing that indicates this jurisdiction is an exception.

That said, my threshold for a T is going to be higher here than on the court. If he swears at his players in the locker room, I've got nothing. But taking the opportunity to accuse us of cheating is over the line.

[just another ref]

As far as the geographical limits of the officials jurisdiction:

2-2-1: The officials shall make decisions for infractions of the rules committed within or outside the boundary lines.


That pretty much covers everywhere, doesn't it?

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by just another ref

As far as the geographical limits of the officials jurisdiction:

2-2-1: The officials shall make decisions for infractions of the rules committed within or outside the boundary lines.


That pretty much covers everywhere, doesn't it?

So the rule book says it is the official's decision. It does not say the official SHALL or MUST give a T to the coach for something he says in the locker room at halftime. It is a decision. Some would call the T...some wouldn't.

For any official to call another a coward, or question their parenting skills, or their moral fiber simply because that official doesn't see this situation the same way as they do is flat-out wrong. It does nothing more than show the kind of person the name-caller truly is.

[Adam]

All I know is this fence doesn't feel good on my back side.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

All I know is this fence doesn't feel good on my back side.

Watch out for splinters.

I would call the T. I don't think my jurisdiction stops at half-time. However, if someone else chooses not to - that's fine. That is their decision. It doesn't hurt the game of basketball if we don't call it. Basketball has been around far too long for one whiny coach to damage the game. Neither does it erode society if we don't call it.

A far bigger problem for basketball is officials who feel free to call their brethren things like "coward" when the brethren won't call something the way that person wants it called. That is what is disturbing...

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

A far bigger problem for basketball is officials who feel free to call their brethren things like "coward" when the brethren won't call something the way that person wants it called. That is what is disturbing...

Agreed. I find this unacceptable.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

So the rule book says it is the official's decision. It does not say the official SHALL or MUST give a T to the coach for something he says in the locker room at halftime. It is a decision. Some would call the T...some wouldn't.

For any official to call another a coward, or question their parenting skills, or their moral fiber simply because that official doesn't see this situation the same way as they do is flat-out wrong. It does nothing more than show the kind of person the name-caller truly is.

Easy, buddy. Don't shoot the messenger. I was just saying that I find this sufficient proof that the technical can indeed be called in the locker room if the official decides it is merited. Just to clarify, some of you that would not call the T in the locker room, is there an instance where you would call it for the same remarks overheard coming from the huddle, or is this still considered to be a private place?

As far as how much is too much in this situation, I find the combination of the comments being "obscenity-laced," along with the use of the word "biased," to be two big strikes. If, on top of this, the officials are reasonably certain that the coach knows they hear him, I have no trouble with the T call.

Having said all this, I am uncertain how the coach gets the news. Do we knock on the door? "Coach, my partner is at the table reporting a technical foul on you for your comments. Your coaches box is gone for the second half. If you wish to see the second half, you should knock it off now."

Or simply say that he's earned the right to finish and settle up when everybody returns from the locker room?