Technical or no Technical?

[constable]

Originally Posted by Kingsman1288

I was working a spring tournament over this past weekend and had a discussion with my partner over a technical I issued to a coach. The situation goes like this...

Fairly close game with about 10 minutes or so left in the second half when a player from white drives to the basket in my primary and hits a layup. I'm L tableside and I observed some contact, but in my judgment not enough for a foul so play continues. As the other team inbounds the ball, white coach pops off the bench and starts yelling for an And 1. I don't acknowledge him at first as he is just offering comments, but as I run by he yells "Blow the whistle son, it's not that hard" WHACK! So we administer the technical foul and the whole time I'm administering them, the coach is telling my partner I need to have a thicker skin, etc. Partner doesn't ask me until after the game why I gave the T, and after explaining to him why, he suggests I need to have a longer leash with coaches.

My main issue is this. I'm 21 and have been officiating since I was 16 and am entering my 2nd season of a full Varsity schedule. However, based on my appearance you would never know it. I'm on the thin side and I have what you might politely call a "baby-face". As a result, coaches tend to target me as someone they think they can work over. This is an issue that I find many of my partners can't understand, and it's not their fault for not being able to. Because of this, I have developed a bit of a quick trigger finger with Ts. For comments like the one above, is a T warranted? Or would I be better off doing as my partner suggested and giving coaches a longer leash? Any thoughts/input are much appreciated.

Edit: In case it's not clear, the original T was for what I perceived to be the coach talking down to me and trying to intimidate me because of my age.

Good job. He earned it.

[Judtech]

JURRASIC; You may need to brush up on both your reading an anatomical skills. I never said I would NOT give the coach an explaination and I didn't read that in TEXAS' post either. IMO, it is more a logistical issue. On a T the calling official goes opposite table, on any other foul the calling official goes table side. This makes any explaination more difficult for the calling official on a T than on a "normal" foul. If a coach wants to wait until I rotate over to discuss it, again, if appropriate, I will be more than happy to do so.
Perhaps I am not paranoid enough. Since I won't throw my partner under a bus, I just operate under the premise they won't either. If I see one of my partners talking to a coach after any type of call, my first thought is not "That SOB, why is he talking to that coach. I just know they are talking about me" To me, the more a crew can show cohesion, the stronger they look. So, if trusting your partners to do the right thing, and trusting in your own skills to do the right thing, is being weak, then I guess I am ( Not weak as Hell though, because if you have EVER smelled burning sulfur UGHH)
As for having no balls, I find so much wrong with that statement. In light of the fact that you have never seen me naked or vice versa, do we really need to play "whose is bigger"? Besides, a good friend of mine who was a wrestler only had one, and he was a pretty strong/bad dude!!! (Although I do hear that when you get older they sag more!)

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Judtech

IMO, it is more a logistical issue. On a T the calling official goes opposite table, on any other foul the calling official goes table side.

In which officiating manual do you find this?

For the record, I can only recall one T where an explanation was needed; an AAU game where I rang up an assistant coach for standing up to yell at me about a call. HC thanked me after the game, stating he didn't know that rule. He may well have been truthful.

Every other T I've called and seen called, the coach knew why he got it. When they ask why, it's a purely rhetorical question that simply serves as their little protest. Sort of like when my kids cry "that's not fair" when I make a decision they don't like.

While I'm as likely as not to mock my kids when they do it, I think silence is a better option to the coach.

[26 Year Gap]

During a recent game, I called a ten second violation. The coach was upset [his team would go on to record one point in the 2nd half] and said, "I didn't see your count." He would have to have been blind to not see the visible count. A couple minutes later, while his team was on defense, he started "1001...1002". Tweet. The only explanation I gave was to my partner.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

During a recent game, I called a ten second violation. The coach was upset [his team would go on to record one point in the 2nd half] and said, "I didn't see your count." He would have to have been blind to not see the visible count. A couple minutes later, while his team was on defense, he started "1001...1002". Tweet. The only explanation I gave was to my partner.

And did your partner explain it to the exasperated and befuddled coach?

[Judtech]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

And did your partner explain it to the exasperated and befuddled coach?

I hope he did otherwise, he might be seen as weak and "sans nads" by others on this board!! What I can't believe is that he actually told his partner what the "T" was for. Scandalous!! What next? Interns at the White House? Gambling at Ricks?!?!
This is a great example of communication, IMO. Had "Mr Arithamtic" asked for an explaination, I would have been turning the sarcasm filter on high!! Probably ending on either "Seriously!?" or "Coach, the problem is our count starts at 0 and apparently yours starts at 1000!!" (ok maybe not THAT one)
As for the foul rotation you asked about earlier, I am using 3 person mechanics. You did pique my interest, b/c I couldn't give you a manual reference for the "T". It apparently falls in the, everywhere I work does it that way so it must be correct. It's just what I have been told from day one. I'll have to dust off the manual and see what that says. Geez, next you will tell me we are supposed to go back and fourth on the endline!!

[Adam]

LOL, the mechanic doesn't differentiate between Ts and regular fouls, IMS. We're an IAABO state, and just went opposite last year for all fouls. When we were table side, we stayed table side on Ts. The option was there to go opposite if the situation was particularly volatile, but I never used it.
Actually, whether the partner explains a call to a coach has no bearing on JR's opinion of his possession or lack of possession of huevos. Honestly, anything more than "you'll have to ask him when he gets a chance to get over here" is overstepping, IMO.
However, as always, when in Rome. Just don't use the stop sign.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

And did your partner explain it to the exasperated and befuddled coach?

Yes. He said, "You have lost your coaching box privileges and have to sit down now."

[Adam]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

Yes. He said, "You have lost your coaching box privileges and have to sit down now."

I need one of the laughing smiley thingies.

[Nevadaref]

[Judtech]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Did you get the buttered layered and extra salt? I also hope you snuck in your own soft drink, those things are EXPENSIVE!

[Nevadaref]

Sometimes it's best to just sit back and enjoy the show.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Judtech

JURRASIC; You may need to brush up on both your reading an anatomical skills. I never said I would NOT give the coach an explaination and I didn't read that in TEXAS' post either.

Maybe you ought to go back and read what you both wrote:

Judtech- "Now when my partner goes to the coach he can tell them what happened."

Texas Aggie- "informs the partner so that he can go talk with the coach and explain if needed and if possible."

If YOU make the call, then YOU should be the ONLY one explaining the call if a coach asks for an explanation. Not your partner. Not ever. And if you go back and read the posts in this thread, you'll find that opinion is unanimous from all of the other responding posters.

Again, your partner should never be discussing your call with a coach. Ever!

That is terrible advice from both you and Texas Aggie. And I'm sureashell not the only one telling both of you that.

You seem to have real problems comprehending what people are trying to tell you.

[Judtech]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Judtech- "Now when my partner goes to the coach he can tell them what happened."
Texas Aggie- "informs the partner so that he can go talk with the coach and explain if needed and if possible."
Again, your partner should never be discussing your call with a coach. Ever!
That is terrible advice from both you and Texas Aggie. And I'm sureashell not the only one telling both of you that.
You seem to have real problems comprehending what people are trying to tell you.

Yet strangly absent from either of those quotes were words to the effect "So I don't have to talk to the coach" Before jumping to conclusions, you should have all the information. You just assumed that I would not talk to a coach about a situation. No one asked (except SNAQdaddy) where we position ourselves on 3 person in this situation. No one asked what we would do in a 2 person crew where the calling offiical was not administering FT's. No one asked what we would do in 3 person crew where the calling official stays table side. Knowing the answers to these questions would give you a better understanding of where we are coming from. Nope, you just wanted to jump in and think the worst of two of your fellow officials. Personally, I prefer to think the best of my fellow officials.
What there seems to be is a difference of norms in different areas. In the college or high school games called in this area, there isnt the sensitivity to discussing calls (appropriately) with coaches. Case in point: In a game tonite B50 drives to the basket and gets blocked by W44. Secondary defender W12 pushes B50 while in the air. Lead official comes out with a foul on W12. As we are on the other end, I am now standing next to W's coach. He is insistent that "it was all ball". I tell the coach "You are right 44 had a nice block, however, 12 was underneath and called for the push". According to you this is inappropriate b/c I am discussing my partners call. I should have said "coach, if you don't like it discuss it with them" According to the lead who made the call, who also happens to be one of the local assignors, pointed that situation out to the 3 'newbies' as a good example of a crew working together and diffusing a situation by calming down a coach. We teach our crews to trust each other. But heaven help you after the game if syou sell a fellow official out to a coach!
SNAQmasterflash: Yeah, if it is a player "T" then we usually stay table side. If it is a coach "T" we usually send them opposite. That way if the coach needs to have an early exit, there will be another official right there to do the honors. The thought process is that it avoids the perception that a particular official is "out to get" a coach. That's not to say the calling official on the other side of the floor wont come toss the coach!!!!

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Judtech

Yet strangly absent from either of those quotes were words to the effect "So I don't have to talk to the coach" ...

I'm still trying to figure out why any official needs to "explain" or "tell" anything to a coach after that coach has received a Technical.