Assistant Coach to the Table

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The general sentiment of the NFHS is to keep the coaches away from the table during the game. As they write, to permit otherwise is to open the door for more.
My take is to not allow an AC near the table.

serious question here, NV. How does the Fed define an AC? How are we to differentiate?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

1) How does the Fed define an AC?

2) How are we to differentiate?

1) They don't. They lump the head coach in with his assistants and just call them "coaches". NFHS rule 4-34-2. The head coach is identified and differentiated in other rules.

2) Ask pre-game who the head coach is and then ask him to identify his assistant coaches.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

1) They don't. They lump the head coach in with his assistants and just call them "coaches". NFHS rule 4-34-2. The head coach is identified and differentiated in other rules.

2) Ask pre-game who the head coach is and then ask him to identify his assistant coaches.

I respectfully disagree with your approach...not because I don't believe your point has validity, but out of a combination of lack of clarity in role definitions and practicality.

1. It certainly doesn't define coaches in 4-34-2, it only states that "coaches" may exist. (We all obviously agree, though the roles are not always clearly defined on a team...a person may play multiple roles.)

2. I honestly don't care who the assistants are. As long as the HC isn't the one going to the table, I've got no problem. And if there are any 'issues' with the communication with the table, then it doesn't matter whether it's an AC or a manager or a statistician, it's going to be handled the same way.

I officiate many games where there are two adults on the bench. One is the HC, and the other is a combination AC/statistician/bookkeeper/defacto manager. If that guy/gal wants to go clarify how many timeouts he has, he can in my game.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

I respectfully disagree with your approach...not because I don't believe your point has validity, but out of a combination of lack of clarity in role definitions and practicality.

1. It certainly doesn't define coaches in 4-34-2, it only states that "coaches" may exist. (We all obviously agree, though the roles are not always clearly defined on a team...a person may play multiple roles.)

2. I honestly don't care who the assistants are. As long as the HC isn't the one going to the table, I've got no problem. And if there are any 'issues' with the communication with the table, then it doesn't matter whether it's an AC or a manager or a statistician, it's going to be handled the same way.

I officiate many games where there are two adults on the bench. One is the HC, and the other is a combination AC/statistician/bookkeeper/defacto manager. If that guy/gal wants to go clarify how many timeouts he has, he can in my game.

How do you know what my approach is when I haven't stated my approach yet? And whatintheheck could possibly be more clear than having the head coach tell you who his assistant coaches are? And when did I say anything at all above about practicality?

I very specifically stated "by rule". And "by rule", assistant coaches aren't allowed at the table. Note that I answered specific questions with specific answers. What I didn't do was state how I would personally handle any bench problems. But if you want to know.....

If there's a problem with a coach going to the table, I'll handle it. If there isn't a problem with a coach going to the table, I ain't about to worry about it.

A little clearer now?

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

If there's a problem with a coach going to the table, I'll handle it. If there isn't a problem with a coach going to the table, I ain't about to worry about it.

A little clearer now?

Super clear. Thanks.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Super clear. Thanks.

Yup, we basically agreed on what we'd both actually do in real life. The rule is there for if/when problems do occur.

[RookieDude]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Yup, we basically agreed on what we'd both actually do in real life. The rule is there for if/when problems do occur.

Well stated...thanks for your responses.

I sent the link to the official I was having the discussions with.