Questioning my T
 

Girls JV game last night. Visiting team only has 7 players, and they are obviously overmatched from the get-go.

It's also pretty obvious that the V coach is wanting to rely on us to keep the game close. He is chirpy all game, and my partner and I give him each a warning in the first half.

With under 30 seconds in the first half, I call a foul and as I'm reporting to the table, he is sitting down and kicks the bleacher with the back of his foot as hard as he can. I probably should have dinged him right then as we had already both warned him, but I didn't. I told him, "Coach, that's your final warning." He told me, "No, I can do that because I'm frustrated with my girls, not at your foul calls."

Yeah, right, but I didn't say anything. I was suffering from a misplaced sense of sympathy for his girls, who didn't even have an assistant coach to rely on if this clown got tossed. Shouldn't have been thinking that way, but I was nonetheless.

Third quarter, his girls are actually starting to make a comeback. This is girls JV basketball, so we're not calling every single handcheck, but we've called a few. One on particular play, the defender rides one of this coach's girls from the top of the three point line to the baseline with her forearm in her side. It was not in my area, and my partner chose to pass on it. As she reached the baseline, she traveled, and my partner got it. (she traveled because of her momentum, not the handcheck, BTW).

Coach is visibly upset and calls a timeout just to give it to us. His voice is definitely raised, but he's not saying anything out of line. He tells us that he knows there is handchecking going on out there, and we're choosing to ignore it. He's partially right, and I really do take his comments to heart as he's talking to us.

But, as he walks away, he yells loud enough for at least the first 6 or 7 rows to hear "SO DO YOUR JOB!!!"

I whacked him.

What do you think?

I don't have a problem with it; however, I would have done it earlier. I only give one warning and then if it comes to it then it's whacking time.

Edit: By "I", I mean our crew only gives one warning.

Are these two different people? I'm guessing the V coach is the assistant in the JV game?

Sorry. V stands for visitor in this case, not varsity.

I would have whacked earlier. My partner and I don't each give a warning. When one of us has given a warning the other is informed. We have a signal. No second warning. But - in this case I would have definately whacked on the kick. I've coached girls MS, JV and Varsity - so I can understand the frustration. However, being frustrated is not an excuse to display unsporting conduct and kicking the bleacher is unsporting conduct.

You and your partner warned him and then you gave him a "final warning." By my count that is two too many warnings. I would also suggest the practice of not allowing a coach to take a time out just to talk to you. Finally, how do you know that "defender rides one of this coach's girls from the top of the three point line to the baseline with her forearm in her side" and it wasn't in your area?

So how would you handle it? He called a timeout and it was obvious he wanted to talk to us, so next time do I just say no and walk away and ignore him?

That's what my partner told me after the game.

I think it's too easy to say "I would have T'd earlier". In sub-varsity games - especially when one team is heavily overmatched, some of us do sway the advantage/disadvantage line pretty far to one side or another. That can get us into a situation like the OP. I think you gave as much leeway as you could and ultimately the coach gave you no choice. Did it help the game? Probably not, but sometimes you just have to take care of business. I'm not sure a T at any time in that kind of a game helps the game, but sometimes they just give you no other choice.

Knowing when the ABS limit is reached is helpful. And usually that limit is reached sooner rather than later. If you warn the guy, then tell your partner and vice versa. How fair is it to the other coach who is abiding by the rules to let this guy get warning after warning? You will only regret the Ts you did not issue or the ones that you did not issue soon enough.

I think the frustrating thing for me is I hate the perception that I am gunning for a coach. When you have a coach like this guy, it's almost impossible to get away from that perception.

Either you let him ride you like a donkey all night (which I'm not willing to do) or you look (to any casual observer of the game) like you're out to get him.

I realize we're not supposed to care "how it looks," but I'm still new and trying to get this perception out of the back of my mind, especially when I whack him and I'm getting multiple people from the stands screaming "That's why you're still reffing JV ball!!!"

I know I shouldn't let it affect me, but some nights, it just does.

I agree that some of us do sway the advantage/disadvantage line in games like these - and shouldn't. But that said, if a T shuts him up - or stops his whining it helps the game. Even better if he uses his time to actually coach or inspire his players. When opponent is beating you up, it's easy for players to get down on themselves and even a comment like, "nice pass" can help. Bit@%ing at the officials isn't going to help anything and will allow players think that it is ok to do. Wrong message - even if officials were overcompensating.

+1

IMHO, when you warn a coach (at any level, under any rules) 1 is all they get. After that we need to "Take care of business" and assess the appropriate penalties to put a stop to the inappropriate behaviour.

Question for the OP - In retrospect, do you believe a Technical Foul assessed earlier in the game would of prevented the coach's escalation in inappropriate behaviour/comments?

Perhaps. He didn't really say much the rest of the game after I whacked him, so probably. The bench-kicking probably should have been the T, not the time out and subsequent yelling.

If this was the only item, you could address it by saying something like, "I understand, but you still need to express it appropriately."

One warning is all he gets. If you give him a warning and then don't whack him the next time he overreacts, its on you. You have forfeited your authority and credibility.

WHACK!!!! Sorry. If you don't whack that, it doesn't matter what he intended, the perception to the other coaches/players and fans is you are getting shown up.

This one was avoidable. had you whacked him earlier, this one would've probably never happened.

Don't use the "That's your final/last warning" thing. It backs you into a corner. Kind of like in baseball where it's discouraged to use the "Not another word, coach" line.

Just warn him once and whack him.

FWIW, if there is a hand check, call it. You may be there 5 minutes longer but at least it will keep people off your back because you're blowing your whistle.

I know it is hard to tune out the fans but take to heart that you're the one doing it out there, not them. It's really easy to sit back and yap. It's a bit more difficult to actually go out and do it.

Thanks, but I think I have all but acknowledged this. My question is, given the circumstances, was the T warranted or since I gave him the leash should I just have let him run with it?

Not calling the handchecks in JV girls, or not calling all of them, would amount to too many fouls and or slow the game down? This is a tough balance when you want to keep the flow of the game going and you want to be fair to both teams. Last weekend my MS G game was very physical and lots of handchecks and grabbing. So we decided to start calling them and help the girls play regular basketball not rugby. It is a tough call at times but I have learned from this forum to be aware of it as well as from experience.

As far as the T - I agree with the other folks that it may have gone too long. But a T should have been called.

Just report it like any other foul and take the emotion out of it. Do not stare at the guy. Call it, report it and change places with your partner who will now give him the sit down speech.

I had one about 2 weeks ago. The guy was chirping like crazy early in the game. My back was to him as trail and I said loud enough for him to hear "That's enough, coach." I advised my partner at the next break, which was not a long time. I was then reporting a foul on one of his players and he started up again in a loud voice and was standing up and it was difficult to report the foul uninterrupted. I finished reporting the foul, blew my whistle, calmly made the T sign and we had no more problems the rest of the night. About 3 minutes into the 2nd qtr.

The more games you do, the more confidence you will have. And it will not look like you are gunning for anyone.

As Guido always says, "Its better to pay late than not pay at all." ;)

I don't think confidence is the problem. I was evaluated just the other night by one of the members of our board who said my confidence is varsity-level. And I did just that on reporting the T. I signaled to the bench, told my partner "Go talk to him" and went down and started administering the free throws while everyone yelled at me. No stare down, no emotion.

I would just rather handle the situation better next time so the perception of "gunning" for the coach isn't there. Perhaps a quicker T would accomplish that.

Technical foul for unsporting conduct: 10-3-6a prohibits "Disrespectfully addressing or contacting an official or gesturing in such a manner as to indicate resentment" (emphasis added).

I think you will find that you will be much more relaxed with a quicker T. Doesn't mean you quick T everyone, but some coaches need one so they can focus on coaching. The games get better, as mine did, once the ABS level was reached.

I had a game a few weeks ago where I wish I would have given the head coach a T much earlier in the game as he was polite and professional the rest of the game after being a howler monkey for the first 3+ quarters (and his team went on a huge run after the T and won the game). He didn't have an assistant so he knew he was on thin ice and the run by his team meant a loss if he got tossed... so it was nice that he turned his demeanor around after the T. We talked after the game and he asked why he didn't get a warning. I told him he didn't deserve a warning for what he said, and we shook hands and that was that. Something to learn from.

My response to this is always "I've never read anything in the rule book about a technical warning, just a technical foul."

My interpreter in another association referred to this as a 'reminder'.

My two bits. Early on, once you realize he's a chirper, find a moment to get in front of his bench and talk to him. "Coach, I can't have you officiating this game." Or "Coach, I understand you're not going to agree with all of our calls, but I can't have you question every single one." Or "Coach, if you have a question, I'll answer if I have a chance, but we aren't going to have these constant comments."

If that doesn't work, two free throws almost always works.

I think this is a very good question. Personally, I find the T that I seem to question myself about later is the one I give late in the game after I have taken crap for three quarters. I have now realized this and I tend to be less worried about handing one out if it is earned. A few years ago, I would tend to take too much crap and then whamo. I feel like I either get them when they first deserve it, or else I have sent a message that their behavior is within acceptable limits then suddenly I change my mind. Does that make sense?

I know there are times when a coach will push it but then suddenly get out of line. Stick them, fine. I guess what I am saying is there shouldn't be a cumulative effect. Either they are unsporting or they are not. Pretty much, if you are questioning yourself whether you should have stuck them or not, especially if you are still wondering well after the game... then yes you should have stuck them. Kicking the bench = tweet! But in all honesty, I probably would have gotten this coach earlier than that.

Even if you'd let it go throughout the game, his final comment earned a T, all by itself. It was personal, and he's showing you up. You'll notice calling the T settled him down. My guess is he was going to continue to push it until you broke. The trick is to settle them down before you break. Call the T before he gets under your skin if you recognize he's not going to stop.

Follow The Leader ...
 

Snaqwells gives excellent advice here. Write it down. Study it. Memorize it. Share it with your colleagues. Make it part of your pregame.

Me : Coach that was your warning "


Me thinking to myself : Do it again and you're on your way to the parking lot.

+1

Well, get ready to attack me, I guess...

I know how you all hate us coaches sometimes, and we often deserve it. I'm not condoning the coach's reaction in this situation, but please try to understand where it came from and to own some of your own mismanagement that contributed to the situation you describe. By your own description, you're picking and choosing to set aside certain rules and calls for whatever reasons you have. Then, from this coach's perspective, you choose to enforce another rule that hurts his team. That is tremendously frustrating. As a coach who regularly works with very underpowered teams, I am painfully aware how a choice not to call handchecks ("because it's a JV game") gives a distinct advantage to the team that was more powerful in the first place.

If it's a handcheck - on my kid or on theirs - please call it. I often feel that my choice to teach legal "keep-your-hands-off-and-move-your-feet" defense puts my kids at a disadvantage in games where officials decide that a hand (or armbar) on the hip is going to be OK that day.

Not to mention, I've had at least one situation where this was happening, and I earned a tech for chirping about it. Nevertheless, after the tech, the officials started getting the opponents' hands off. I hate having to "take one" just to get the game called by the rules, but I have to admit, getting that tech improved the game for my players.

Believe me when I say if I had called every single handcheck in that game, pretty much every girl would have fouled out. Would that have been good "management"? Then the coach would have been upset with me for "not letting them play."

Can't win for losing with you guys...

All contact is not a foul coach... per the rule book. If no advantage is gained (does not affect rhythm, speed, quickness or balance) then a foul does not exist.

I will give you an example... Your girl is driving to the basket and the defender has her hand on your players hip. However, it does not affect your player and she is beating her to the hoop for a layup. By your response above, we should call a foul and give you the ball out of bounds or let your player shoot free throws (and she may be no good at those!) rather than let her continue the drive and score the easy lay-up. That sounds like great defense by the refs imo.

My point is there is no absolute when it comes to this kind of foul (unless its NCAA men where John Adams has stated that a two hand hand check is an absolute). So when you are chirping that they have there hands on them, you may be right but it is not necessarily a foul. ;)

...or they would have laid off the handchecks and played better "real" defense. Coaches and players adapt to the officiating either way. If you give players the opportunity to gain an illegal advantage and not got called, most of them (in particular the better ones) will take the advantage you give them.

That may be.... You definitely can't when you start deciding which rules to enforce. I will say in my case, that I don't recall ever asking an official to "let them play" and overlook illegal contact. That's just in my case; I've heard others do it. Now I have heard coaches say, "if he (she) keeps that hand on your hip, run him (her) over to make sure they make a call - one way or the other." That's the risk you run managing it by letting it go.

Unfortunately, SO much of it is allowed in some games that we have to specifically run "bad defense" drills to teach ballhandlers to maintain composure with significant illegal contact. We tell the players on defense that this is specifically NOT how to play defense in the game, but to handcheck and armbar the ballhandler the length of the floor.

I agree. And the OP himself didn't call this incidental contact with the hands. He called it a "handcheck" - which is a foul per the rule book. The OP never suggested that these weren't called because they were incidental, he said they weren't called because "it was a JV game" and "every player would have fouled out."

From one of the NFHS presentations on POEs:

And from the 08-09 POEs:

So you're right - per the rule book, it does not constitute "an advantage" but rather "a tremendous advantage."

PS - I'm sorry to get snippy, but contrary to what you might read on this board, some of us work just as hard as officials to understand the rules. I have my rulebook in my game binder right behind "How to Win Friends and Influence People."

Sorry coach....Hand checking does not always create a "tremendous advantage" and in many cases it creates no advantage... If it doesn't create an advantage it wont be called by me or my crew. Sorry coach, but I am not out there to blow my whistle when it isn't needed (the athletes don't want that, the fans don't want that, officiating supervisors don't want it and almost every coach out there doesn't want it). The last thing I want to do it take away two points with a whistle and comeout with a "tweet-- hand check-- no basket" and if you are honest with yourself... you don't want it either.

Its knowing when an advantage is created is what seperates the good officials from the average to poor ones.

Get snippy all you want, it doesn't change anything.

The NFHS disagrees with you. You're the one who said "per the rule book" then made up your own verbiage. I quoted the NFHS. If my player is going to the hoop with a hand on his or her hip, you're supposed to call it. The more you don't, the worse the game gets.

Wrong. The game goes on as normal, we have flow and the kids get to play. I have never (in many many years calling at just about every level) had a game go bad when I didn't call contact that did not create an advantage. Advantage/ Disadvantage is covered in the rulebook... If you want rulebook robby to call your games (and not apply judgement), have points taken off for such trivial contact and have your players foul out for the same more power to you... I can assure you that you are in the minority.

I am done with this. Since you are a coach and must always have the last word here is your chance... somehthing tells me you dont get it anyway.

JoeT,

You have presented your case and provided references to support your position. There are time where some want to present their subjective perspective to suit their point of view.

Refereeing advantage/dis-advantage sometimes allows players to play through some of this contact. If the NFHS book was used in its literal form without exception many games would turn into free-throw shooting contests. This is exception not the rule. Without knowing the level of skill of your team and the competition first hand I can't say for sure. But on a particular night its something to consider.

Advantage/Disadvantage; I have heard this so much lately that it hardly makes sense to me anymore. I think we have taken it too far and use it too frequently to avoid making calls that should be made. Or we use it as a bailout when we fail to make a call that we feel we should have made.

Most of the time when I hear it used, it is interpreted only as creating a disadvantage for the offensive player. It is rarely referenced when a defensive player gains an advantage. As in a hand being used on an opponent acting as an aid in starting or stopping. It doesn't disadvantage the offense by limiting their movement, but is does advantage the defense by aiding their movement.

I'm not taking sides concerning the posters involved in this discussion but I think we as officials need to seriously think how we interpret Advantage/Disadvantage and "see the entire play." I think, as a group, we frequently incorrectly overuse each concept.

Forgive me, but I'm going to pick on your wording just a bit here. A literal use of the rule book requires us to determine if an advantage has been gained by the contact. Look at the definitions of "foul" and "incidental contact" in the rule book, and this becomes clear.

The dilemma is that different officials have different ways of determining an advantage. While the NFHS may want us to use a lower threshold for hand checks than for rebounds, there still needs to be some determined advantage (impeding, holding, pushing, etc.) in order for there to be a foul.

I picked on this wording because of the common phrase, "a foul is a foul." While it's a truism, it's a misleading one that assumes "contact" = "foul," and that officials have to figure out which fouls to call. That's not the case; we have to determine which contact is a foul, and call all the fouls.

What do you think? Really nothing to think about.

Not a problem. I like your explanation better than mine. I am just simple:p

This is why I avoid getting in discussions with coaches. Because you don't understand the role of officials. You think my job out there is to be a robot, and call everything the way you see it, as if I have some magic goggles that allow me to see things from a coach's perspective.

If I literally enforced every rule in the book to the T (no pun intended) as you suggest, you would not recognize the game as "basketball." It would be a free-throw shooting contest.

There is a concept called advantage/disadvantage that you should really learn about. We officials have to master this concept, or we don't last long because coaches like you complain that we never let their girls "play ball."

Like I said, can't win with you guys...

Fiasco,
First of all, I am definitely not known for being anything but patient with coaches, BUT, I must confess, I would have issued the "T" long before you did.

These are the situations that drive coaches CRAZY -- ESPECIALLY if they are overmatched!!! You and your partner know that a team is overmatched, yet your partner allows the opponent to ride the player for TWENTY FEET and BOTH your partner and YOU -- perhaps a little too much ball watching, here in my opinion -- PASS???

I have done my share of girls subvarsity games in the past. Some of these games are ugly no matter what we do to avoid it. But, in this case, by allowing the team that was dominating the game to ride a player all the way to the baseline (what if the point guard really wanted to get to the basket, but the defender's hands/arms pushed her to the baseline/endline instead?), you and your partner were at least partially responsible for the situation. If BOTH of you passed on the FOUL, why not pass on the travel, too???

In my opinion (I WAS NOT THERE, this is JUST AN EDUCATED GUESS), you did not issue a technical foul because you were not comfortable doing so, earlier. My guess is that you do not feel that the game was well played. You also did not think it was particularly well officiated, either.

Try to keep your focus. Call handchecks when they cause the dribbler to go in a particular direction -- particularly if the hand stays in contact with the dribbler. Make foul calls to keep the game in control. It is up to the coaches to teach the players to play within the rules. It is NOT our jobs to modify the rules because the coaches have failed to teach them.

Just my $.02 from a coach with over 30 years experience and a referee for well over a decade.

Perfectly worded!

Once we have determined the contact is a foul, we need to call it even if it causes the offended player to lose an opportunity for a wide open lay-up.

Hard to believe that there was NO DISADVANTAGE for a girl who was overmatched and was being ridden like a horse for 20 feet!!!

There are many difficult (and bad coaches). In the case of the coach in this thread (Joe T), I think he has been reasonable in stating his case.

My question to you is "have you ever coached?" I think the one thing that has helped me as an official more than anything else over the years of officiating is my experience as a coach. I can appreciate all of the hard work that they put in preparing their team for a game. I respect that. I respect them.

Consequently, I have tended to get along with coaches from teams that are winning and teams that are losing. I don't take a lot of grief from them -- quite honestly, I usually don't hear a whole lot. Yet, they know when the respect is no longer mutual during a game, I have to take action with the proper penalTy.

One of my pet peeves is the huge divide that officals create with coaches AND coaches create with officials. We each have a VERY difficult job to do. If we work together, the outcomes are usually pleasant.

Yes, I have. Before I began reffing, I coached for three years in a intra-collegiate basketball league. It, basically, was a glorified intramural league, but with tryouts and a draft and a lot more structure than your usual intramural league.

And I'd have to say that I never viewed the officials the way I do now. I knew nothing about advantage/disadvantage, I was unaware of all the intricacies of officiating, the rules I thought I knew and actually didn't, etc etc.

In other words, I thought I knew a whole lot about officiating until I put on a shirt and whistle and stepped out onto the court. Then I found out I knew squat.

I respect coaches to a point. I don't think, for the most part (emphasis added), coaches at my level (JV and below) respect officials. They don't respect what our job actually is (as opposed to what they perceive it to be). They don't respect our calls. They don't respect us as human beings, from the way they treat us (yelling, rolling their eyes, stomping their feet, talking down, etc etc). Oh, they do during the coaches meeting, and they smile and shake hands, but once the ball is tipped they become totally different people.

95% or more of coaches, I would say, have never taken the time to not just dig into the rule book, but spend a summer reffing in their local rec league to see what it's like. So they don't know what it's like on the other side of the court. They don't know what it's like to work your ace off learning the rules and applying them on the court and doing your damndest to make sure you call a fair game and still be looked at and treated like you just killed someone's children because you dared to call a foul on someone. And they never will. And that's our job to deal with that fact.

Wow, this behavior would be stopped quickly here, I can tell you that.

I'm going to go out on a very large limb here and say that, in my opinion, having done both, that officials have a much harder job, within the context of one basketball game, than do coaches.

Your job as a coach is to maximize the play of your team.

My job is to be judge, jury and executioner (in some cases). It is our job, as officials, to be God out on the court. We decide what is a foul and what is not.

Furthermore, coaches think it's their job to do whatever humanly possible in order to (I'm trying to think of the most respectful word here) influence the officials into calling a game that gives an advantage to their team. Whether conscious or subconscious, most coaches do this with what they talk to us about, when and how they scream at us, and their behavior in general.

The best coach, to me, is a coach who asks me questions calmly and respectfully, or doesn't talk to me at all. I make a habit of initiating as little communication as possible with coaches because I've found that it has a way of biting me in the behind. So, in that way, my job becomes harder.

Sad thing is, those coaches are very hard to find.

Boy, I'm really starting to sound like a hardened cynic, aren't I?

Well, I do my part, but I'm considered T-happy.

I'm late to the party, and it looks like the fun has already begun. :D

Some random thoughts:

• The T was clearly deserved. No question.
• Negative behavior never lengthens a leash. If you allow a coach some extra leash in a certain situation, you still decide where the leash ends.
• Coaches are grown ups, and must act that way. Our empathy or sympathy must never extend to allowing a coach to behave badly.
• Snaqs is right, address behavior early. Early, a quiet word is often sufficient. One example: I worked a freshman tourney last weekend where a team was getting blown out in the third quarter. The coach, who had not previously been a problem, began to referee. I slid over next to her at the next opportunity and quietly asked, "Coach, are we okay?" Then I listened to her reply (which was not very reassuring). But she went back to coaching and that was the end of that. Sometimes it really is that easy.
• An official must develop a clear, comprehensive philosophy for managing blowouts. Knowing already how we will call the game, control the game and handle the coaches in a blowout both improves the game and reduces anxiety about whether to whack a coach.
• You write as though the crew chose which fouls to call based on managing the number of foul calls rather than managing the game. It is best to pre-game specifically where the crew will draw its various lines, then consistently call to those lines from the very first play. By the first quarter break the participants should know that tonight you're allowing "x" but not allowing "y".
• If you worry about calling "too many" hand checks, don't stop calling, start talking. Tell the kid, "Hands off!". If he does it again, call the foul then find him at a dead ball and tell him, "I'm trying to keep your number out of the book, help me out here." He'll either adapt or he will soon bench himself. Either way you will have called only the fouls necessary to clean up the game.

As always, just my $0.02

Don't question your T. Coach deserved it long before he got it. A sitting coach is usually a very quiet coach. A quiet coach makes for a nicer game. A smart coach realized where the officials line is drawn and will not cross it. If he chooses to cross it, then he knows what the expected result is.

The best thing any official can do is communicate with the coaches and players. Tell the players to get their hands off. Call a few early, they will get the picture and start playing without their hands. Let the coaches know when he is pushing the line. But still talk to them. I agree some coaches do talk down and seem as if they want to try and pull something over on you. No matter, treat and talk to them as you want to them to treat and talk to you. Until they cross the line. Give them the T before you become emotionally involved. You will feel better about it.

I love how a coaches defense is always "well have you coached?" Does that really matter? Lots of great officials have never coached before. Doesn't mean that they love the game any less. Doesn't mean that they know the game any less. Coaches and officials need to realize that it isn't about them. This game is all about the kids. We can play without coaches, or at least another will step in, but can you play without the officials? Mutual respect goes a long ways.

From reading your responses, I see somebody who today is where I was not that long ago. I realize that to some degree you're venting your general frustrations at some coaches and their "feedback". But I also see signs of having the wrong attitude and being the victim of your own lack of skills.

If you are going to make this thing work for you, you have got to do a few things well that you don't seem to be doing very well right now. You've got to be able to communicate effectively with everybody involved: partners, players, coaches, table crew, everybody. That especially means engaging (not necessarily confronting) coaches when there is an issue, not running away from them. You've got to be able to call the obvious and what matters, control the game, and do it all consistently. You're going to have to be around a while, so people have time to learn to trust you. And you've got to exude a positive attitude and show due respect toward the game and each of the participants.

You're off to a good start, and you've made some important discoveries, including that most coaches don't know the rules very well. So, now how do you take what you have learned and what you can now do and use your knowledge and skills to bridge that gap? Because the game is about them, not about us. We're just the facilitators.

My philosophy is this:

The only technicals I regret are the ones I didn't call.

I do baseball as well. I can't tell you how many T's I've called or people I've tossed ( in both sports) but I can with a pretty good amount of certainty tell you the players and coaches that I didn't T up or throw out when I should have.

Been firm but fair. Develop your own threshold but remember not to allow unsporting behaviour to go unpunished for too long. If you don't deal with a problem in the first quarter, it will only multiply by the time the 4th rolls around.

Finally, penalize any and all personal attacks- Do your job is a classic example of one.

My Own Philosphy On Hand Checking ...
 

Defender places both hands on a ball-handler, it is a foul.
Defender continuously places a hand on the ball-handler, it is a foul.
Defender continuously jabs a hand or forearm on a ball-handler, it is a foul.
If the dribbler’s rhythm, speed, balance, or quickness are affected, we should have a hand-checking foul.

Also. If dribbler's going east/west, less likely to call a hand check.
Conversely. If dribbler's going north/south, more likely to call a hand check.

And finally, advantage/disadvantage must be considerd in the case of hand checks.

This is not always an easy call.

I NEVER use the word "warning" in addressing coaches. I may use the stop sign and say, "That's enough coach." I think saying, "This is your final warning," is baiting the coach.

To me, you're backing yourself into a corner with it; if the coach says something else, you're pretty much obligated to ring him up.

Of course, some would say the same thing about the stop sign.

Usually, if I give the stop sign, I've already given him/her a reprieve. Anything further after stop sign is a T.

First of all, keep in mind that I officiate tons of Club Soccer games/tournaments, OHSAA high school soccer games, youth basketball games/tournaments and OHSAA high school basketball games each year.

I also happen be the Director of Coaching for a soccer club and help coach a single basketball team. Point is, I am far more of a referee now than I am a coach.

That said, this attitude -- and the limb you are out on -- is part of the problem. This statement implies that you do not respect coaches to the level that you respect referees.

Top college coaches make millions of dollars each year. Top college officials make, well, let's just say somewhat less than that. Apparently, a fair number of people must think that coaching is at least a little challenging.

When I coached, I spent many hours each week watching tape preparing for our next opponent. I prepared a game plan. We developed that game plan during many hours of practice during the week. We would then make final preparations the hour before the game for the execution of that plan. We then attempted to execute that game plan during the game.

As a referee, you show up somewhere between 15 minutes and one hour before the game. You prepare for the game during that period of time. You conduct your pre-game, you stretch, and you get ready to officiate the game. You officiate the game and the game is done. You may discuss the game with your partners for a debrief after a game. It is quite rare that an official would watch a tape following a game (I have done it several times).

As a coach, after the game is over, I would almost always watch the tape at least once before going to bed. I was reviewing our performance against our game plan while beginning to prepare for our next game.

Many coaches follow this same routine all season. If part of their game plan is to attack one of the opponent's guards because they are constantly using their hands/arms to play defense (handchecking/arm barring), the coach EXPECTS the referees to do their part and properly make these calls. If the referees elect to only "call a few of them", they are shortchanging that team. If one team is shorter than the other team, the shorter teams better get good rebounding position and box out consistently. If the officials allow pushing on rebounds, electing only to "call a few of them, but not all of them", they are shortchanging that team.

I do not mean to imply that officiating is easy. I have a tremendous amount of respect for the work that WE as officials do each time we walk out onto the floor. At the same time, please respect the job that coaches do as well.

I just get frustrated when referees act like coaches are the enemy AND when coaches act like referees are the enemy. I have some very good friends who are coaches. Some think that referees are out to get them. This usually becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. I have attempted to convince a few of them to get their referee license to gain a better appreciation for how difficult our job as officials really is. At the same time, I have a number of other good friends who are referees as well. Many of them have very good relationships with coaches in general. For the most part, these are the officials who get the high level tournament games each year -- regardless of the sport. There are others who insist that coaches are the enemy. The vast majority of these officials do not last very long. Those that do, end up being very frustrated throughout their careers.

Respect is a two way street between referees and coaches. The first step toward a successful career in EITHER profession is to respect the job that the other does day in and day out. BOTH professions require dedication, hard work and respect to be successful.

Still another $.02.....

I try to let a higher power perform the role of God. I just try to go out, work hard to create a fair atmosphere for both teams.

I am thinking the view you have just might be one of the reasons why coaches view you the way they do. I don't mean to be harsh, I really don't. But, my goal is to be as transparent as I can during the game -- only getting involved when it is required. If the game ends and no one notices my referee team, it is the ideal game from my perspective. Your appears to transform yourself into the Supreme Being during a game.

"Top college coaches make millions of dollars each year. Top college officials make, well, let's just say somewhat less than that. Apparently, a fair number of people must think that coaching is at least a little challenging."

Not really. As evidenced by the recent Mack Brown 5,000,000 dollar contract, the mantra is follow the money. Texas football brings in over 80, 000,000 a year to the University. It's about the bucks.

That said, I understand your response to fiasco.

...and if coaching were easy, you would think that Texas could find a coach (or Ohio State could find a coach) for far less than $5M.....If it were easy, I could do it. I would be happy to save my alma mater money by taking the OSU job for no more than $1.0M. :rolleyes: I am just guessing that these coaches (football and basketball -- Coach K makes some pretty good money as does Thad Matta) MUST be able to do something pretty special to get the money they are paid.

Otherwise, Texas, Ohio State and Duke would not pay the big salaries.

Not necessarily true... We show up any where from 1.5 to 1 hour before the game. Many of us break down every game tape we get and review every call or questionable no-call. Many of the leagues I work put every game on a specific website that we are required by our supervisor to download and review. Many of us work games 3-6 nights per week and we talk about about plays in our pre-games, post games and with our colleagues while we spend countless hours on the road travelling to and from the games. This is all in addition to the thousands of dollars we spend each year and many weekends during the off season away from our families to get better and provide the participants the best product possible. You are severely underestimating the behind the scenes work that we as officials put in....

Oh please, I was an official for almost 10 years - check the "join date" on my post. You didn't describe it as incidental contact; you said it was a handcheck. The rule book (which some people only seem to like when it suits them to mis-quote it) says specifically that handchecks are not incidental contact, and it's been a repeated POE to ask officials to be more diligent about enforcing it.

If you look back at my earlier posts, I agreed that there is incidental contact that should not be called. By YOUR description, these were "handchecks" that were not called "because it was a JV game" and the girl "rides one of this coach's girls from the top of the three point line to the baseline with her forearm in her side."

This has gotten a little irrelevant. We're not talking about college coaches/referees. We're talking about high school sub-varsity coaches and referees. There's a reason why many coaches and referees are working at the sub-varsity level. Some are "up and comers" and will be at the varsity level very soon. And some are "never gonna get there" and just will never get the nuances of the job. It's the "never gonna get there" folks that generally create the problems night after night with communication techniques, understanding of the rules and how to apply them, and game management. This is a generalization, but at the sub-varsity level, you just never know what you're gonna get till you start the game. And I think it can get ugly fast if you have an imbalance either way with a good coach and a bad official or vice versa. That's just the nature of the beast.

Communication with coaches has always been a difficult thing for me to learn - probably the most difficult thing. I do not have the charisma that many other people have to be able to communicate easily under difficult situations. It is something I still work on, but I have gotten so much better. Like anything else it is just something you have to work on and learn from your failures. And working those sub-varsity games is the very best place to work on those skills.

Ok, Coach. I've heard you.

BBall_Junkie,
All true points. I am guessing that you are NOT talking about high school games that are required to be downloaded and reviewed. I think that this would be a good idea for HS referees for at least one or two games every year.

I would tell you that the TYPICAL high school referee does NOT review tapes of every game (many seldom, if ever, do).

The chief point in my post was to indicate that BOTH referees AND coaches have a difficult job that we should ALL respect.

Smitty,
I agree. I only bring up the college coaches' pay vs. referees' pay to illustrate that some folks recognize that coaching is NOT an easy job.

Your observation concerning sub-varsity games is dead on for both referees and coaches. Some of the worst scenarios are not necessarily with a "good" member of one community and a "bad" one in the other as much as when BOTH fit into the "bad" category. Usually, a good coach can recognize a "bad" referee within the first couple minutes of a game. The difference between the "good" coach and the "bad" coach is that the good coach recognizes what he has and adjusts his game plan accordingly (no handchecks being called tonight, well, let's step up the defensive pressure) while the "bad" coach will continue to yell at the "bad" referee convinced that by pointing out each mistake a referee makes during the game, the referee will somehow become a great referee by game's end.:rolleyes: Similarly, the "good" referee recognizes the "bad" coach and ignores the coach to the extent possible trying to avoid giving the coach the chance to do something stupid.

Communications is difficult for everyone when they first start out -- everyone meaning referees AND coaches. Communicating with referees in an appropriate way takes some level of experience -- especially when, as a coach, you are pumped up for the game. Similarly, communicating with coaches -- many of whom don't like you because of your clothing -- takes experience as well.

I don't really have a problem with this, but then again I think I'm averaging a little over one T a game in high school games this season. I'm trying to take the nice approach and ask the coach to let the situation go. Of course, I don't mind having the perception of an official who will call a T...

I think you are worried about perception too much. What about the perception that a coach can act in an unsporting manner during a scholastic event? The coach does it and then the players start to take adopt the same behavior. If we took care of unsporting behavior more, it would clean up the game. I was in a college conference where Ts flew around all the time and unsporting behavior was decreased. It works.

Wow, I really hope that I never have to be calling Ts almost as frequently as timeouts during a game to keep a game under control.

If it is true that you are averaging more than 1 T per game in HS, you must be reffing in "The League from Hell." :)

I average about 2 a season. One for each gender.

If you worked in Portland, you'd have to average 4 per season to average one for each gender. :rolleyes:

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

No, I was mostly talking about college games (I am not trying to stir the pot) but I don't know any high school coaches that make "millions of dollars" therefore I interpreted your comments to be aimed at the college game.

If we keep it apples to apples I know of many JV level coaches that spend as much time prepping for a game that JV officials do for the same game....

Outside of that, point taken.

I'd love to do this more. But it's really difficult to get game tapes 'round these parts. :(

Hell I was doing a senior V game the other week and we had 4 in that game.

one kid asked me if I was ****ing serious after I called a foul on him, then my partner called a double T for chirping and pushing during a dead ball, then some one mouthed off to him in the 4th.

2 T's a year sounds like a cake walk!

It is! :cool: And I may be exaggerating that.

I have been to Vegas, Washington DC, Mississippi and back to Vegas. 2 Ts a season just isn't feasible.

Most of the Ts I call are related to unsporting acts - a pet peeve of mine in high school games. I'm always amazed at the fact that the same problem doesn't exist as much in college games where coaches have more at stake.

good for you. I'm not overly T happy. I guess there is just more unsporting behaviour here.

I tried my best to apply this last night in my girls JV game. I was R, so in my conference I made a point to have a positive, upbeat attitude with the coaches and let them know we'd appreciate communication with them.

Did it do any good? Not really.

End of 1st quarter, I'm T as the clock is expiring. B1 has the ball and jumps into A1, who jumps vertically to block the shot. There is a good amount of contact, but I have nothing, as B1 jumped into A1's vertical space.

Well, B coach isn't please with my call. Normally, I would ignore him and talk to my partner during the break between quarters, but, trying to take your (and others' advice), I go over to talk to him. I'm calm, I'm pleasant, I explain to him that his player jumped INTO the other player, therefore there's no foul even though there was contact.

He laughs at me (nothing outrageous, more of a sarcastic chuckle), rolls his eyes, and says "whatever." He is ice cold to me the rest of the game.

Yes, this was just one game, and it's not going to keep me from working on my communication, but I'm honestly convinced at this point it is less me and more the coaches. They don't want to be reasoned with.

No need to go over to the coach on a situation like this. If you so happened to be near him and he comments, then yes, a quick and short reply may be appropriate. But don't go out your way to explain, especially a play as basic as the one in question.

I was T on the play next to the benches. He was asking why it was not a foul.

Defense was straight up, coach. That's all I would say and move on.

Fiasco,
I don't reason with my dogs and I don't reason with coaches. I don't plead, I don't cajole, I don't care if they "get it". It is them.When my dogs pee in the house its not me being a bad owner, its them being coaches.. I'm glad I'm learned this part of my game. The communication skills I have with my dogs, I mean the coaches, make my games go nicely.

I'm polite,professional, and have a good attitude.

They ask a legimate question, I started out giving them stock replys. Billy Mac has several cut and pastes in regards to these stock replys.

Here's an Example.

Coach: Thats a foul. There was contact, or pushing or whatever.
Me: Coach all contact is not a foul.

I had about 3 or 4 of these stock answers. I could memorize all of them and one of the four would usually apply to the given situation. That worked till I was ready to freelance.

Coach chirping/reffing. Stock answer " I'll ref. You coach"

I lived and breathe the 3 P's. :)

If it's personal, profane, or persistent = one big FAT T..:D

Though I usually don't let the persistent go. I address it and it ends voluntarily or I end it. LAst night Asst Coach barking loud in the first MINUTE, first chance I got I had a quick little chat with Head Coach. Problem solved.

Keep it simple. And remember it is them ,but we still need to work with them,

even if we have to rub their noses in their pee sometimes. Just kidding but it sounded funny to me.

This may be my favorite post ever.

In a later post you say you answered a question. But here you state he disagreed. I made a call Monday night as L. Offensive player in post pushed defender and received an entry pass for an easy bucket. Except for the whistle. Coach said something like "THAT is you first call?" Of course it wasn't. And if he had asked what was the foul I would have answered him. It would not have served any purpose to engage him. Did not have any problems with him the balance of the game. But it sounds like you went over to offer free advice. Comments are either ignored or whistled if there has been ABS. It does you no good to go looking for the coach to explain something.

I didn't go looking.

He didn't like my call, and so he asked me about it.

Why is this so hard to understand?

You did not state he asked a question till a later post. Maybe the 'communication' issue is not just with coaches. Just sayin'.

Clarification is part of communication. Maybe you need to work on reading comprehension before you criticize my communication skills. I had already stated that the coach asked a question before your diatribe.

You said, "Well, B coach isn't please with my call. Normally, I would ignore him and talk to my partner during the break between quarters, but, trying to take your (and others' advice), I go over to talk to him. I'm calm, I'm pleasant, I explain to him that his player jumped INTO the other player, therefore there's no foul even though there was contact."

What post was it where you said he asked a question?

Given the length of this thread, it is apparent that any response that suggests he might want to change things up is met with resistance. People can get a lot of good advice on this site. If they want it.

Seriously, do you read any of the posts? Or do you just scan and see what you want to see.?

My initial post today on this thread was about just that. Taking advice I had gotten on here and applying it, and how it didn't do much good, but I'm not going to quit.

But, by all means, keep painting me with that broad brush you seem to value so much.

You're a big boy. I'm sure if you look hard enough you can find it.

Yes, I am a big boy. Here are some of your highlights from this thread.
So, you made a call in front of the bench as time was expiring. He asked you about it. Remember, you was in front of his bench, his team was playing defense because it was the end of the first quarter. The quarter ends and you "go over" to talk to him because you can tell "coach isn't please with my call."

Well, if he asked you a question and you was right in front of his bench, you shouldn't have needed to go anywhere to answer his question - remember this play happened as time was expiring. But in another post you say you could tell he wasn't happy with your call, which was actually a no-call, so you go to talk to him. Where is the question in that?

Can you tell us what really happened. If we belonged to the same association and you explained this situation to me followed by telling me an evaluator said you did something on the varsity level question marks would pop up.

Where did I say I was in front of his bench? Hmmm?

Reading is FUN-DA-MENTAL.

After the quarter is over you are no longer the Trail next to the his bench, you should now be somewhere along the division line waiting for the 2nd quarter to start. In your own words you say "I go over to talk to him". That's what my answer to you addresses.