Assistant Coach to the Table
 

"10.5.1 Situation C Case Book 2009/10

The coach of Team A leaves the bench area and goes to the table to seek information other than a correctable error:

(a) during a time-out;

(b) during the intermission between the first and second quarters.

RULING:

A technical foul is charged directly to the coach in both (a) and (b). If this information is required, it must be secured by a manager or statistician, etc. when the clock is stopped and the ball is dead. A coach is not permitted at the table for this purpose. To allow exceptions would open the door for exploitation and would result in situations which could not be enforced consistently."

I have an ongoing discussion with a fellow official...

Is there anytime a crew would allow an assistant coach to go to the table...for any reason?

What if a coach says that his "assistant coach" is in fact a "statistician"?

Interesting question. There's no distinction in the book for "assistant coach," and often times the AC's job during the game is to keep track of things (such as a statistician.)

He'd better be holding a pad/book with some statistics on it!

Based on what? What if he left it at his seat? What if he keeps track in his head? What if he's the "manager?" What if the AC's secondary job is to wash the uniforms during the week. Doesn't that make him the manager?

I was being facetious, I don't expect to find a pencil in his ear! I don't know you tell me. As long as he is not the head coach and is at the table for a legitimate reason (and not on a regular basis) I can't see a situation where I would make a big deal about it.

Sorry, I misread (happening a lot today.) I'm with you.

Agreed. There is no real definition of an assistant coach or stat-keeper, manager, etc. They are all just bench personnel.

If it becomes a constant thing, it's worth checking with the table and/or the coach about, but otherwise, no reason to go looking for something.

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.

Three adults on the bench. Head coach and two others, all wearing matching polos. Both of the "other" personnel are keeping some sort of stats during the game, and both are also doing some individual coaching.

Allowed to approach the table or not?

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

1) By rule(above), no.

2) Ask the head coach pre-game who his assistant coaches are and you'll never have to worry about it. :)

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.

You mean like this? :eek:


http://foreskinpress.files.wordpress...cil-in-ear.jpg

Constipated Mathematicians Work It Out With A Pencil ...
 

Better than this:

http://thm-a01.yimg.com/nimage/b342a146eb9e09b8