It lasted until Game 9

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

Not to play Monday morning quarterback, but...

Could you have found a way to discuss her concerns, at least tell her what you saw and/or briefly explain your call, before she got to the screaming point? If so, might that have de-escalated her or even prevented her from getting "escalated" in the first place?

No, and I'll explain why.

This team was AWFUL. I'm talking couldn't get the ball across the division line awful. The play she screamed on was the first or second time they finally got it across half court, and my partner warned her after it happened the first time. (I was L and he was T and her bench was on the opposite end) This was the first quarter still, and it was the first time she had said anything to us because up to that point, the other team was stealing inbounds passes and shooting layups.

The next time they got the ball across the division line and in the paint after he warned her is when he T'd her. Her girls were getting their shots blocked cleanly and she was pissed because she was down by 20+ already in the first quarter, so she decided to scream again about "You've gotta call that!!". I actually did finally call a shooting foul but just before I blew my whistle, he blew his for the T on her.

Both times she screamed I was L and he was T. We didn't have a chance to talk to her because her hysterical screaming was the only thing she said. She was warned for it once and was T'd the next time.

I agree with whoever said they don't like their partner going to talk to the coach after they have T'd him/her. I think it makes it appear that he is buddying up to him/her and playing the "good cop", but in this instance I had to get in between them so we could move on with the game. He was going to let her stand there and eat on his a** for five minutes if she wanted to.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by zm1283

...but in this instance I had to get in between them so we could move on with the game. He was going to let her stand there and eat on his a** for five minutes if she wanted to.

There's a reason the fed gives the option (and many associations/camps/supervisors will more-or-less say mandatory) to go away from the table after a T.

I had a partner at an NCAA-W camp last summer (we were using fed rules and mechanics) get his *** chewed for choosing to stay. My other partner (I was L) went across to switch with him. He wanted to stay and "handle" the situation. His handling it ended up with him calling a second T.

First, the evaluator chewed P1's a$$ for staying. Called it ego. Based on how the first T went down, he needed no explanation and nothing good could come from P1's staying.

Then turned to P2 and said, "Good job of going to get him, but be stronger next time! Once you go over there you tell him in simple terms that you're there now."

Then turned to me and said, "You're smart enough to see that wasn't going to end well. You saw P1 was being an idiot, and P2 was weak. You don't have many options being at Lead, but I'd have had no problem if you would have gone and taken control of that situation. Just get P1 out of there."

It was fun.

My entire rambling point is, there's a huge difference between a partner buddying up a coach after a T, and getting the calling partner out of there before a tense situation escalates.

[tomegun]

I've heard many things in this thread, but nothing that will change what I do. I'm not saying this as an absolute, but I still don't see much reason for my partner to be near a coach after I give a T. Especially if we are in the second half and my partner has to go into the backcourt to be near the coach.

Every T on a coach I can remember has been obvious and there isn't anything that needs to be said afterward - the exception is a coach to said my partner was racist for not giving him a shooting foul (I T'd him up fast).

What Rut always says applies in this case: you do what works in your area. I know plenty officials who wouldn't like this though, myself included.