Bobby Huggins Ejection

[Rich]

"You'll never work this [school, conference, league] again" is a ticket to the locker room for me.

If the coach has the power to get me chunked from a conference (as apparently a local football coach did, since I haven't worked that conference in 6 years), then I'd rather not work the conference at all. In the meantime I can't think of one good reason to let that coach finish the game.

[budjones05]

Technical fouls are just part of the game. I do not know what was said, but I will say judging Coach Huggins behvior throughout the years I feel it's been overdue to run his A**. I'm sure the Big East will look into this and hand out punishment as they seem fit. I tried not to give the second techincal but sometimes you just have to flat out handle your business. Nobody has more respect for sports officials than us. But sometimes those officials are afraid to handle business.

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by big jake

Who were the refs and who gave him the thumb????

The crew for the game was:

John Cahill
Mike Stuart
Michael Stephens

I do not know who whistled the T's.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by KJUmp

The crew for the game was:

John Cahill
Mike Stuart
Michael Stephens

I do not know who whistled the T's.

The information is out there, but I still ask why it matters. My assumptions:
1. If the guy who called the Ts is a long time official, I'll defer to his judgment and assume he had a good reason for being in the huddle. And Huggins should have known better.

2. If the guy who called the Ts is newer to the league, and a younger official, I'll defer to his judgment and assume Huggins was testing him. He passed.

Whether he needed to be in the huddle or not is not for me to judge, because I don't have all the information I would need to make that assessment.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

The information is out there, but I still ask why it matters. My assumptions:
1. If the guy who called the Ts is a long time official, I'll defer to his judgment and assume he had a good reason for being in the huddle. And Huggins should have known better.

2. If the guy who called the Ts is newer to the league, and a younger official, I'll defer to his judgment and assume Huggins was testing him. He passed.

Whether he needed to be in the huddle or not is not for me to judge, because I don't have all the information I would need to make that assessment.

John Adams doesn't like the official in the huddle (see the Andy Katz thread), but again I wonder why that really matters since Adams doesn't hire these guys to work in the Big East. Somebody should ask the commissioner of the Big East and he can say what's expected.

[JRutledge]

Unless we have talked to the officials, unless we know what was said or what was not said, I really think the reasons for the T are all speculation. We have no idea what the conversation was directly about or if it was about some other play that did not take place. It might have even been about a previous game. This is why I hate these so-called absolutes officials like to claim that are valid. He was probably in the huddle because the coach was trying to engage him. And if he was across the court coach Huggins still would have been yelling. Until we know for sure what was said I really think it is silly for those to claim this is how it should have happened. Because I can think of a few things if they were said to me I do not care that I am the one that gives both Ts. Giving Ts and the reason for them are personal. The rules do not say what is or what is not specifically a T in many situations. And when I hear people all the time claim that certain actions are flagrant on the spot, how the heck do any of us know what was said. Huggins has a history of flying off the handle and even was ejected in an NCAA Tournament game a few years back while at Cincinnati. All I have to do is look at the person involved and that tells me all I need to know.

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

The information is out there, but I still ask why it matters. My assumptions:
1. If the guy who called the Ts is a long time official, I'll defer to his judgment and assume he had a good reason for being in the huddle. And Huggins should have known better.

2. If the guy who called the Ts is newer to the league, and a younger official, I'll defer to his judgment and assume Huggins was testing him. He passed.

Whether he needed to be in the huddle or not is not for me to judge, because I don't have all the information I would need to make that assessment.

Mike Stuart called both "T"s. He's in his 14th. year of doing D1 ball and is on both the SEC and Big East staffs. He's worked in 10 straight NCAA tournaments before this year, and last year he did 4 rounds.

I'll also assume he's got a pretty good idea of what he's doing.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by mbyron

You dumped on JR because you disagree with him.

Disagree: JR engaged in dialog, visitor stuck to his guns, JR called him out. Did you read the entire thread? Seemed productive to me.

JMO.

I'm all for pointing out the mistakes of the new visitor...and Jurrassic was completely right on the points related to what the visitor had said about the T being deserved or not. Unfortunately, he extrapolated what the visitor said to put words in his mouth about what kind of partner he'd be...totally unwarranted and unjustified. As much as JR clearly knows about officiating (he's usually right), he just can't seem to have a debate on the points without insulting someone or exaggerating their words. That is what is wrong. Treat the new guy with every bit of respect you expect for yourself...even if the other person is completely wrong.

[Judtech]

It takes a big man to admit when he is wrong, I am NOT a big man - Chevy Chase "Fletch Lives"
BUT being 6'4"...........
I believe I DID admit my error in judging the warrantedness (if that is even a word) of the "T". If not, I offer once again my Mea Culpa, throwing my self on my sword while ripping my clothes and sitting on a pile of ashes while wearing sack cloth.
Can't we all just get along? - Rodney King

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Judtech

It takes a big man to admit when he is wrong, I am NOT a big man - Chevy Chase "Fletch Lives"
BUT being 6'4"...........
I believe I DID admit my error in judging the warrantedness (if that is even a word) of the "T". If not, I offer once again my Mea Culpa, throwing my self on my sword while ripping my clothes and sitting on a pile of ashes while wearing sack cloth.
Can't we all just get along? - Rodney King

Just for the record, the other issue seems to be your insistence that it was handled incorrectly without having the necessary information.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I'm all for pointing out the mistakes of the new visitor...and Jurrassic was completely right on the points related to what the visitor had said about the T being deserved or not. Unfortunately, he extrapolated what the visitor said to put words in his mouth about what kind of partner he'd be...totally unwarranted and unjustified. As much as JR clearly knows about officiating (he's usually right), he just can't seem to have a debate on the points without insulting someone or exaggerating their words. That is what is wrong. Treat the new guy with every bit of respect you expect for yourself...even if the other person is completely wrong.

OK. I happen to agree with JR that what people say reflects their character, and that you can learn a lot about what kind of partner someone would be by listening carefully to what they say. Not everything, but a lot.

JR's inferences seem a little too quick sometimes, but then again he's experienced a lot more partners than I have. You find his conclusions "totally unwarranted and unjustified." I disagree with that, and in any case his point might be that people need to be more aware of the connections between what they say and how they behave on the court.

When JR says "you're full of crap, and you probably throw partners under the bus," perhaps he's really making a more general point like: "People who say crap like that make terrible partners." Maybe his mode of expressing it comes off sounding personal; but the lesson behind it might be true, and so worth learning from, no?