Not using it any more.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Are you actually saying that on the first instance of any unsporting yelling you'd issue a technical foul? Always?

It's Black, It's White
It's Tough For You
To Get By
It's Black , It's White, Whoo

It's Black, It's White
It's Tough For You
To Get By
It's Black , It's White, Whoo

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

We talk all the time about how coaches should not be allowed to show us up, yet this signal does that very thing to the coach.

This.

It's a very public admonishment which rarely, IMO, helps the situation. It may help CYA if you need that kind of video evidence for an assignor, but I see no way it's better than a quiet verbal message that conveys the same thing but doesn't show the coach up to the entire gym.

[truerookie]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You would have to assume that all officials are using the "stop sign" in my area. I do not know that every official has to use this or tries to use this. So it is not about the area, it is about the coach. If it works I would not have to give a T. I am just not convinced it works and I think it incites more than it stops actions. And it has nothing to do with approved or not approved signal. I think I will get back to the words I use and make it very clear they have crossed a line or just stick them when appropriate.

Peace

My point was just a thought. I got you.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

My problem with the stop sign is that it comes across as dismissive. We talk all the time about how coaches should not be allowed to show us up, yet this signal does that very thing to the coach. Geese and Ganders come to mind here.

I completely agree. They act more like...."How dare you tell me to be quite...." And that is why it does not work for me.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I've had much better success speaking quietly to them and letting them vent (appropriately), and I've witnessed good veteran officials do the same.

This has worked well for me for years. Then if I had to give a T afterward, the coach never felt that I was trying to embarrass them.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

If your association wants you to do it so you have something the video will catch, so be it. I don't need that, as my report (every T gets one here) will be good enough for my assigners.

Coaches know why they get Ts. They try to act like they are innocent, but they know why. And even if you use it on tape, a coach can still claim they did nothing wrong. The coach I T'd up yesterday made the claim he did not curse, which for me is the least of my concerns.

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Use whatever method personally works best for you.

[umpref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

My problem with the stop sign is that it comes across as dismissive. We talk all the time about how coaches should not be allowed to show us up, yet this signal does that very thing to the coach. Geese and Ganders come to mind here.

I've had much better success speaking quietly to them and letting them vent (appropriately), and I've witnessed good veteran officials do the same.

If your association wants you to do it so you have something the video will catch, so be it. I don't need that, as my report (every T gets one here) will be good enough for my assigners.

The stop sign IS dismissive, and that is the point!

By rule, the coach does not have a right to display dissent to officials calls. Coaches also ARE NOT tasked with administering the game and the rules! He is there to COACH his players. I fail to understand where coaching his players include the right to yell at officials.

The stop sign is not appropriate for every situation, just like talking quietly with the coach isn't appropriate for every situation. It is another tool for the tool bag that "good veteran officials" will learn how to use at the right time. I cannot tell you when/where you should use the stop sign, but in my area, it has been a HUGELY EFFECTIVE warning to coaches, and since officials have started using it in the last few year or so, it has helped manage coaches away from ejections.

Hey, in baseball, once that hand comes up, that IS the 1st technical. My next action is ejection!

As to comments about "record it in the book". I will utilize the book in any way I see fit to keep track of warnings. In our area, we are asked to have the book record delay of game warnings. I don't find it a stretch that we can use it to record a warning to a coach. Also, as I learned in baseball, doing this ALSO has a positive effect on the coach settling down, because in his mind, this has become an "official" warning. He knows he is going to have a hard time arguing his eventual ejection when there is a paper trail of is sins on the court.

Does any of this work for every coach? Nope! That is why there is the technical (personally, I think in basketball that if you have issued a stop sign warning, or any kind of verbal warning to a coach, next step should be ejection...that gives it BITE!). No technique works every time, nor is every technique the end all solution for every situation. Again, it is another tool to use. Officials much better than anybody posting here have deemed it useful, and most organizations have bought on. Not my place to question that.

I have found over the years that as I become more open minded about using these techniques, I gain better outcomes.

I will admit though, I am no fan of in NFHS baseball where you can restrict a coach to the bench. I haven't heard where it has worked more often than not. In my informal polling of umps doing sub-varsity games (they seem to be the guys that use this "tool" the most) most complain that the coach still does what he was doing before, just from the bench now. Of course, I tell the umps that they will probably need to explain to the coach that they cannot do that anymore, but that is offset by why should I be informing the coach of his rights? He has a rule book too!

So, my point is, yeah, I have dug in my feet on a suggested mechanic that I don't feel works too well. I have to admit though, a few guys I have talked to LIKE the ability to restrict a coach to the bench in baseball, and use it quite a bit when appropriate. I find other ways to manage the coach. Maybe one day I will give it another shot.

So, the stop sign just may not be for everybody. But, if it isn't for you, don't write it off!

[umpref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

My problem with the stop sign is that it comes across as dismissive. We talk all the time about how coaches should not be allowed to show us up, yet this signal does that very thing to the coach. Geese and Ganders come to mind here.

I've had much better success speaking quietly to them and letting them vent (appropriately), and I've witnessed good veteran officials do the same.

If your association wants you to do it so you have something the video will catch, so be it. I don't need that, as my report (every T gets one here) will be good enough for my assigners.

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Use whatever method personally works best for you.

LOL That would be the simple way of saying what I just said.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by umpref

The stop sign IS dismissive, and that is the point!

By rule, the coach does not have a right to display dissent to officials calls. Coaches also ARE NOT tasked with administering the game and the rules! He is there to COACH his players. I fail to understand where coaching his players include the right to yell at officials.

I fail to see where anyone in this thread has said this. With whom are you arguing, chief?

Originally Posted by umpref

As to comments about "record it in the book". I will utilize the book in any way I see fit to keep track of warnings. In our area, we are asked to have the book record delay of game warnings.

Um, it's not just your area, it's in the rule book. Tha'ts the difference:

Originally Posted by umpref

I don't find it a stretch that we can use it to record a warning to a coach.

Some of us do find it a stretch. However, all of us have acknowledged that if that's how it's done in your area, so be it. Again, with whom are you arguing here?

Originally Posted by umpref

He knows he is going to have a hard time arguing his eventual ejection when there is a paper trail of is sins on the court.

Rest assured, if I T a coach his sins will be documented. But I'm not concerned about whether he argues it to the state or my assigner. I'll get the backing I need.

Originally Posted by umpref

Does any of this work for every coach? Nope! That is why there is the technical (personally, I think in basketball that if you have issued a stop sign warning, or any kind of verbal warning to a coach, next step should be ejection...that gives it BITE!).

You're kidding, right?

Originally Posted by umpref

No technique works every time, nor is every technique the end all solution for every situation. Again, it is another tool to use. Officials much better than anybody posting here have deemed it useful, and most organizations have bought on. Not my place to question that.

Most? Really? Have you done a scientific poll to determine this? I've been in three different metro organizations, none of which promoted use of the stop sign.

Originally Posted by umpref

I will admit though, I am no fan of in NFHS baseball where you can restrict a coach to the bench. I haven't heard where it has worked more often than not. In my informal polling of umps doing sub-varsity games (they seem to be the guys that use this "tool" the most) most complain that the coach still does what he was doing before, just from the bench now. Of course, I tell the umps that they will probably need to explain to the coach that they cannot do that anymore, but that is offset by why should I be informing the coach of his rights? He has a rule book too!

So we can't question the stop sign (not an NFHS signal), but you can question an official NFHS tool in baseball?

Wow.

Originally Posted by umpref

So, the stop sign just may not be for everybody. But, if it isn't for you, don't write it off!

I didn't write it off, I've merely expressed my opinion as to why I don't use it anymore. That's all I've seen anyone do in this thread.

[umpref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I fail to see where anyone in this thread has said this. With whom are you arguing, chief?
Um, it's not just your area, it's in the rule book. Tha'ts the difference:Some of us do find it a stretch. However, all of us have acknowledged that if that's how it's done in your area, so be it. Again, with whom are you arguing here?
Rest assured, if I T a coach his sins will be documented. But I'm not concerned about whether he argues it to the state or my assigner. I'll get the backing I need.

You're kidding, right?
Most? Really? Have you done a scientific poll to determine this? I've been in three different metro organizations, none of which promoted use of the stop sign.

So we can't question the stop sign (not an NFHS signal), but you can question an official NFHS tool in baseball?

Wow.



I didn't write it off, I've merely expressed my opinion as to why I don't use it anymore. That's all I've seen anyone do in this thread.

What is your point?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by umpref

What is your point?

You're right, that's a much more concise way to word my post.

[umpref]

I made mine with clarity. Are you just taking jabs at me with yours? You seem to have another agenda.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I totally disagree with this protocol. It seems that instead of having a T in 9 out of 10 times, you have some warning which doesn't exist and isn't part of the rules recorded in the scorebook. In my opinion this procedure screws the team which does not receive such a warning during the game. If the opponent was behaving in an unsporting manner, then it should be penalized as called for in the rules. But if your entire association agrees to do otherwise...

While I know this doesn't agree with the Rules of God Nevadaref, please do not attempt to put words in my mouth.

I never said it was something that is part of the rules. It's a local mechanic that our association uses.

We don't use the warning if the behavior warrants a T. We use the T.

Therefore, the other team is not screwed.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by umpref

I made mine with clarity. Are you just taking jabs at me with yours? You seem to have another agenda.

You responded to my post with this statement:

The stop sign IS dismissive, and that is the point!

By rule, the coach does not have a right to display dissent to officials calls. Coaches also ARE NOT tasked with administering the game and the rules! He is there to COACH his players. I fail to understand where coaching his players include the right to yell at officials.

I'll ask it clearly, where did I or anyone imply any of these things that you so vehemently disagree with?

Now, I will ask, where does it say the coach doesn't have the right to display dissent?

You did a great job of burning down some strawmen, but I never really got your point. No one has said the alternative to the stop sign is allowing rampant unsporting behavior. My experience has been the opposite, in that unsporting behavior has always followed when I've used it. Is it possible I'm using it incorrectly? Sure, but I'm not the only one with this opinion.

Perhaps you can share with my what my agenda appears to be, as I'm not aware of it.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

No one has said the alternative to the stop sign is allowing rampant unsporting behavior.

BS.

"In my opinion this procedure screws the team which does not receive such a warning during the game. If the opponent was behaving in an unsporting manner, then it should be penalized as called for in the rules."

That's exactly what NevadaRef said.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

BS.

"In my opinion this procedure screws the team which does not receive such a warning during the game. If the opponent was behaving in an unsporting manner, then it should be penalized as called for in the rules."

That's exactly what NevadaRef said.

Sorry, I tend to forget his posts shortly after reading them; this was no exception. Looks like I need to be more careful when making categorical statements about threads in which Nevada has participated.