Coach pleas for a foul... and GETS IT

[Jburt]

Originally Posted by bbcof83

...or at least that's how I'm sure it looked to B's coach. I normally don't care how I "appear" to anyone, but this situation bothered me a little.

Sit: Last couple minutes of a well played boys V game. Team A is up by 5. Team B is playing very aggressively against A's clock draining weave, taking chances for a steal but not afraid to foul. A's coach, right behind me (I'm T), starts to yell "HAND CHECK!" any time an A player starts to dribble and B is close. Second time through weave he yells "HAND CHECK!" again. He happens to be correct, A1 was displaced by a push from B1. I blow my whistle and turn to report while partner lines players up for bonus FTs. I'm a little annoyed with the LOUD cry but forget about it quickly.

20 seconds later, next time A has the ball, same thing happens. "HAND CHECK!" TWEET! Hand check foul. Now, this time I turn around and B coach gives me the "Just because he's crying for it doesn't mean you have to call it."

This happens a third time in a row within a 1 minute span. And now I'm aware of how this may appear (doesn't help that I'm the calling official all three times).

Question, would any of you handled this situation specially? Would any of you perhaps said anything to A's coach about toning it down? Since the home team had the ball when A's coach was yelling it was quiet enough for the whole gym to hear. I'm sure it appeared (to some biased viewers) that my whistle was prompted by the A coach's plea. When in fact, he was just anticipating B being too aggressive and fouling and I was, of course, reacting to the players' actions.

Why were you the T in all instances? Maybe a switch on the fouls would have given your partner a chance to make one of the calls.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Jburt

Why were you the T in all instances? Maybe a switch on the fouls would have given your partner a chance to make one of the calls.

He only made one call. The coach was whining when there were no calls being made.

[TimTaylor]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

He only made one call. The coach was whining when there were no calls being made.

Rich,

From the O.P. it looks to me like he called three fouls within a one minute span...

FWIW, I agree with you on the T......try to talk them out of it first, and if that doesn't work we always have the T to resort to.....

[Rich]

Originally Posted by TimTaylor

Rich,

From the O.P. it looks to me like he called three fouls within a one minute span...

FWIW, I agree with you on the T......try to talk them out of it first, and if that doesn't work we always have the T to resort to.....

Yup. If he's using the new NFHS mechanic and they're shooting fouls, though, he's going to make the same call 3 times in a row. See the thread I started.

Sorry, I skimmed right past that part.

[Jburt]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

He only made one call. The coach was whining when there were no calls being made.

Originally Posted by bbCO3

I blow my whistle and turn to report while partner lines players up for bonus FTs. I'm a little annoyed with the LOUD cry but forget about it quickly.

20 seconds later, next time A has the ball, same thing happens. "HAND CHECK!" TWEET! Hand check foul. Now, this time I turn around and B coach gives me the "Just because he's crying for it doesn't mean you have to call it."

This happens a third time in a row within a 1 minute span. And now I'm aware of how this may appear (doesn't help that I'm the calling official all three times)

.

[Jburt]

I agree that a quick word should be enough to diffuse the situation, but perception can be reality and sometimes we need to let our partners get a call, especially when the mechanics call for it.

edit:
Rich, just saw your other thread about the new FT mechanic, in my area we are not using the new mechanic. I realize that switching may not have been the proper mechanic, but maybe for GM standpoint...?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Jburt

I agree that a quick word should be enough to diffuse the situation, but perception can be reality and sometimes we need to let our partners get a call, especially when the mechanics call for it.

edit:
Rich, just saw your other thread about the new FT mechanic, in my area we are not using the new mechanic. I realize that switching may not have been the proper mechanic, but maybe for GM standpoint...?

I agree that in this situation, forcing a switch may have been useful, but it's covering up the problem rather than addressing it. They should've shut the coach down earlier.

I learned a lesson back in the mid-1990s. I was asked to do a women's college scrimmage and I treated it like a scrimmage. And the teams hated each other and the one coach told his guards to hand-check the hell out of the other team (I found out later) until the officials called it. Instead of just calling a few fouls, I tried to adjust to a level of play I was unfamiliar with and was eaten alive by both coaches. Since then, I don't let players direct players with hands and I don't let coaches whine about this kind of play when it's not illegal or when we're not calling to their liking.

If it's a lower level game, it's a chance to work on GM skills. "Coach, I'll take care of this, you coach." Walk away. If he doesn't get the hint, whack him. I forget that at the varsity level, coaches usually get the hint or they don't keep their jobs long.

[Back In The Saddle]

The perception that one coach can bully you into making calls will definitely cause you problems. The coach cannot be allowed to persist in calling the game from the bench. A quiet word very soon after the behavior begins should do the job. If not, take stronger measures.

Also, if you are repeatedly on the hot seat because of the new FT mechanic, my advice is to force a switch to get yourself out of a bad situation. Then when your partner calls the next hand check, it should diminish the perception that you personally are being controlled.

Just my $0.02

[bbcof83]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I agree that in this situation, forcing a switch may have been useful, but it's covering up the problem rather than addressing it. They should've shut the coach down earlier.

...

You and others are right, Rich. I should have said something to A's coach the first time. We had a good rapport going throughout the game and I bet he would have responded favorably. Shoot! Luckily the situation didn't send the game into a talespin, (far from it, I think my post sounds more severe than it really was) but it's definitely a good learning experience for a new V official.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bbcof83

We had a good rapport going throughout the game and I bet he would have responded favorably.

You'll learn.

That "good rapport" will go right in the dumper as soon as you make a key call that he doesn't like. Just do your job. And part of doing your job is not letting any coach try to do it for you, no matter how friendly they might try to be while doing so.

There's all kinds of different tactics that coaches will use to try to influence your calls. Killing you with kindness is one of 'em.

Be polite, say as little as possible and stay away from the coaches unless necessary to do your job. That's the best rapport that you'll ever have imo.

[bbcof83]

Originally Posted by Jburt

Why were you the T in all instances? Maybe a switch on the fouls would have given your partner a chance to make one of the calls.

New two person mechanic. Calling official stays table side when FTs are to be shot. We were in bonus.