Flagrant for Words

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Really...one player tells another player "I'll kick your $#%^$% a$$" using a racist/bigoted term in place of '$#%^$% a$$' and you're just gonna write it off as a run-of-the-mill 'T'?

Why does that have to be flagrant? I agree it can be a T, but flagrant? This is your personal issue, not something that is automatically supported by rule. Which is why the rules are kind of vague (deliberately I believe) on what is or is not a flagrant and even sometimes a T.

Peace

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Why does that have to be flagrant? I agree it can be a T, but flagrant? This is your personal issue, not something that is automatically supported by rule. Which is why the rules are kind of vague (deliberately I believe) on what is or is not a flagrant and even sometimes a T.

Peace

What if a kid says to another kid "next time down I'm taking you out" and you just tech him and the coach leaves him in. Then next time down he DOES take the kid out, do you think you have any liability there? Agreed highly unlikely, just for discussion. Any threat like this is "see ya" for me, if only for this reason.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by slow whistle

What if a kid says to another kid "next time down I'm taking you out" and you just tech him and the coach leaves him in. Then next time down he DOES take the kid out, do you think you have any liability there? Agreed highly unlikely, just for discussion. Any threat like this is "see ya" for me, if only for this reason.

Here is the problem with your logic here. A kid could say nothing like that and draw a T from me. I have heard things said here by others that claim they would draw an automatic T from them (which are fine by me) but you cannot decide that for me. I do not need words to give a T. I will and have used body language during a contentious moment as a guide without hearing a word.

I will give a better example. I am an African-American male that happens to work a lot of games with other African-American males. There is certain language that is historical or language patterns that are used in the African-American community that are not easily understood by many that are not African-American. And no I am not talking about the simple use of a specific word. I am talking about a series of characterizations that I might recognized that would draw my attention that might never draw the attention of anyone else, but would do so to me and others that are the same race and culture. And even then I have ways of handling those things without giving a T if the right circumstances occur. That is why I said if you want to give a T that is your right. Specific words are not under the rules as illegal and since language constantly changes that is why you get paid the big bucks to make those decisions. But to be critical of people that do not want to give a T because you want to give a T is not as easy as you think.

Peace

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Here is the problem with your logic here. A kid could say nothing like that and draw a T from me. I have heard things said here by others that claim they would draw an automatic T from them (which are fine by me) but you cannot decide that for me. I do not need words to give a T. I will and have used body language during a contentious moment as a guide without hearing a word.

I will give a better example. I am an African-American male that happens to work a lot of games with other African-American males. There is certain language that is historical or language patterns that are used in the African-American community that are not easily understood by many that are not African-American. And no I am not talking about the simple use of a specific word. I am talking about a series of characterizations that I might recognized that would draw my attention that might never draw the attention of anyone else, but would do so to me and others that are the same race and culture. And even then I have ways of handling those things without giving a T if the right circumstances occur. That is why I said if you want to give a T that is your right. Specific words are not under the rules as illegal and since language constantly changes that is why you get paid the big bucks to make those decisions. But to be critical of people that do not want to give a T because you want to give a T is not as easy as you think.

Peace

I am not trying to be critical at all, didn't mean to come off that way. I was honestly asking a question, if the scenario I proposed were to happen do you think I as an official would have any liability? I think there is a good chance that I may, so I don't think I would take chances in a situation where someone is that explicit. By all means you have to make that judgement for yourself, every official does.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by slow whistle

I am not trying to be critical at all, didn't mean to come off that way. I was honestly asking a question, if the scenario I proposed were to happen do you think I as an official would have any liability?

Liability for what? What if you did not hear the comments? I gave a double T about 2 weeks ago and I have no idea what the players said to each other. And I never claimed it was for their words.

Originally Posted by slow whistle

I think there is a good chance that I may, so I don't think I would take chances in a situation where someone is that explicit. By all means you have to make that judgement for yourself, every official does.

Do you have some legal precedent for this? Is there a court case where an official was held responsible for the actions of a player that said something to another player? Because if that is the case what do you do if you do not hear the comments at all. I realize that we think we know everything as officials, but most of the time I have no idea what players actually say to each other and it really gets hard if you are a loud gym and fans are all over the place.

Peace

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Liability for what? What if you did not hear the comments? I gave a double T about 2 weeks ago and I have no idea what the players said to each other. And I never claimed it was for their words.



Do you have some legal precedent for this? Is there a court case where an official was held responsible for the actions of a player that said something to another player? Because if that is the case what do you do if you do not hear the comments at all. I realize that we think we know everything as officials, but most of the time I have no idea what players actually say to each other and it really gets hard if you are a loud gym and fans are all over the place.

Peace

I was only commenting to the scenario I laid out where I heard a player tell another player that and penalized based on what I heard. We can scenario play all day long and the penalty changes in each scenario, but if a player says "next trip I'm taking you out" and I tell a coach that he said that (you can be sure that he is going to ask what his player said), then there isn't a whole lot of wiggle room as far as what was said. If I didn't hear it then I am telling the coach "I didn't hear exactly what was said, but the two had words that I judged to be unsportsmanlike", or something similar and agree with you just issuing a regular tech (or double tech).

To your question about precedent, no I am not a lawyer, but it doesn't seem like much of a leap to me if I fail to protect a kid from an explicit threat that I heard and told someone else that I heard, that I could be liable in some way. Seems more prudent in that case to disqualify and tell the coach and player "Sorry, but I can't let it play out to see if you would really act out what you threatened."

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by slow whistle

I was only commenting to the scenario I laid out where I heard a player tell another player that and penalized based on what I heard. We can scenario play all day long and the penalty changes in each scenario, but if a player says "next trip I'm taking you out" and I tell a coach that he said that (you can be sure that he is going to ask what his player said), then there isn't a whole lot of wiggle room as far as what was said. If I didn't hear it then I am telling the coach "I didn't hear exactly what was said, but the two had words that I judged to be unsportsmanlike", or something similar and agree with you just issuing a regular tech (or double tech).

That is fine with me.

Originally Posted by slow whistle

To your question about precedent, no I am not a lawyer, but it doesn't seem like much of a leap to me if I fail to protect a kid from an explicit threat that I heard and told someone else that I heard, that I could be liable in some way. Seems more prudent in that case to disqualify and tell the coach and player "Sorry, but I can't let it play out to see if you would really act out what you threatened."

The reason I asked is because you are some how taking on a responsibility for the action of someone else. First of all I did not say I would not give a T, but to throw someone out just for that is kind of premature in my opinion. And your scenario is rather silly on so many levels. I have never heard a player ever talk to another player like that during a basketball game let alone a football game where contact is even worse. Now if I hear that I will consider the context and the situation in the game. But I am not going to live being afraid of something I did not say to a player. There are things like assault and other legal issues that are problematic for the player, not the official that just happened to be there. Of course anyone can sue you and will try, but I doubt seriously that is going to happen in your situation as it would have to be heard by many people and if I give a single T I am not writing a report on why I gave the T. You seem to be afraid of something that really is not realistic like the "boogy man" because someone told you it exists. Now that is your right to take action, but I do not go around worrying about liability of what actions a player decides to take. If I allowed someone to play with illegal equipment and they got hurt that is a different story. But a player that runs his mouth to another player, not something I am going to worry about more because someone thinks I am responsible. I will take that to court any day of the week and feel good about the situation.

Peace

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by slow whistle

I was only commenting to the scenario I laid out where I heard a player tell another player that and penalized based on what I heard. We can scenario play all day long and the penalty changes in each scenario, but if a player says "next trip I'm taking you out" and I tell a coach that he said that (you can be sure that he is going to ask what his player said), then there isn't a whole lot of wiggle room as far as what was said. If I didn't hear it then I am telling the coach "I didn't hear exactly what was said, but the two had words that I judged to be unsportsmanlike", or something similar and agree with you just issuing a regular tech (or double tech).

To your question about precedent, no I am not a lawyer, but it doesn't seem like much of a leap to me if I fail to protect a kid from an explicit threat that I heard and told someone else that I heard, that I could be liable in some way. Seems more prudent in that case to disqualify and tell the coach and player "Sorry, but I can't let it play out to see if you would really act out what you threatened."

Agreed, a player threatens another player, I probably would take him at his word and give him a night off.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Really...one player tells another player "I'll kick your $#%^$% a$$" using a racist/bigoted term in place of '$#%^$% a$$' and you're just gonna write it off as a run-of-the-mill 'T'?

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Why does that have to be flagrant? I agree it can be a T, but flagrant? This is your personal issue, not something that is automatically supported by rule. Which is why the rules are kind of vague (deliberately I believe) on what is or is not a flagrant and even sometimes a T.

Peace

I didn't make mention of anything being "supported by rule". It was a question to a poster who said he would have difficult time tossing someone for words.