One T or two - if one, on who?

[Judtech]

This would be different then hearing a coach swear which would be an auto "T". Until there is an actual punch in the face, I am not sure you can do anything. If there is no action, it becomes a 'he said/she said" incident. The coach could claim it is a figure of speech, or that you misheard what they said. If there was nothing else going on then just the coach yelling at his team, then that would be one thing. If that coach is on the floor and has their arm around a player and is pointing at the other teams huddle and singling out a player, then I would hit the T right there.
In the OP, I would make sure that the whole crew that something might be afoot and get us all on the same page. Since the player took the swing they would both be gone. I would make sure that our supervisor knew of the incident and I am positive we would send a letter to the school stating that unless changes were made they would have to find another organization to cover their contests.

[APG]

That's an easy one. Flagrant technical fouls for both the player and coach. Why wouldn't one penalize both actions?

[Welpe]

Flagrant techs for both.

[Daryl H. Long]

Originally Posted by Judtech

This would be different then hearing a coach swear which would be an auto "T". Until there is an actual punch in the face, I am not sure you can do anything. If there is no action, it becomes a 'he said/she said" incident. The coach could claim it is a figure of speech, or that you misheard what they said. If there was nothing else going on then just the coach yelling at his team, then that would be one thing. If that coach is on the floor and has their arm around a player and is pointing at the other teams huddle and singling out a player, then I would hit the T right there.
In the OP, I would make sure that the whole crew that something might be afoot and get us all on the same page. Since the player took the swing they would both be gone. I would make sure that our supervisor knew of the incident and I am positive we would send a letter to the school stating that unless changes were made they would have to find another organization to cover their contests.

When I assess a Flagrant T I never take into consideration what a coach might claim afterwards before doing so. Additionally the coaches flagrant act stands on its own. It does not become flagrant because the order was carried out.

Using your own thinking Why are they both gone if the player swings? If you couldn't prove the coach gave the command when you first heard it, you can not prove it later either. Besides, if you wait until command is carried out before punishing the coach what makes you think he won't still use the same arguments you mentioned.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Judtech

This would be different then hearing a coach swear which would be an auto "T". Until there is an actual punch in the face, I am not sure you can do anything. If there is no action, it becomes a 'he said/she said" incident. The coach could claim it is a figure of speech, or that you misheard what they said. If there was nothing else going on then just the coach yelling at his team, then that would be one thing. If that coach is on the floor and has their arm around a player and is pointing at the other teams huddle and singling out a player, then I would hit the T right there.
In the OP, I would make sure that the whole crew that something might be afoot and get us all on the same page. Since the player took the swing they would both be gone. I would make sure that our supervisor knew of the incident and I am positive we would send a letter to the school stating that unless changes were made they would have to find another organization to cover their contests.

1. Coach swearing isn't an auto-T, IMO. 99% of the time? Maybe. 90%? Sure. But not automatic.
2. If a coach tells his player to punch another player, I cannot imagine a situation in which i wouldn't call a flagrant T.
3. You don't think telling a player to punch an opponent is worse than swearing?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

1. Coach swearing isn't an auto-T, IMO. 99% of the time? Maybe. 90%? Sure. But not automatic.
2. If a coach tells his player to punch another player, I cannot imagine a situation in which i wouldn't call a flagrant T.
3. You don't think telling a player to punch an opponent is worse than swearing?

+1

A coach telling a player to punch another player might in fact constitute a crime.

[constable]

Coach is done regardless if the player throws or connects the punch.

player is done if they throw it.

Either way, coach is going.

I agree- coach swearing not an auto T. If they are pissed at their players or made a boneheaded mistake then they can vent their frustration at themselves and their team. If their venting is loud enough that people in the crowd can hear it, well then we have an issue.

If their swearing is directed at me, well then we have another issue.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Judtech

This would be different then hearing a coach swear which would be an auto "T". Until there is an actual punch in the face, I am not sure you can do anything. If there is no action, it becomes a 'he said/she said" incident. The coach could claim it is a figure of speech, or that you misheard what they said. If there was nothing else going on then just the coach yelling at his team, then that would be one thing. If that coach is on the floor and has their arm around a player and is pointing at the other teams huddle and singling out a player, then I would hit the T right there.

Wow... what an enormous pile of nonsense.

ANY Tech for something a coach says "could" become a he said she said ... he "could" claim it as a figure of speech, and he "could" say you misheard him (heck ... this happens all the time!) but it doesn't matter - you heard it, and you have the responsibility to act on it. You T this IMMEDIATELY, and eject, and report.

[Judtech]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Wow... what an enormous pile of nonsense.

ANY Tech for something a coach says "could" become a he said she said ... he "could" claim it as a figure of speech, and he "could" say you misheard him (heck ... this happens all the time!) but it doesn't matter - you heard it, and you have the responsibility to act on it. You T this IMMEDIATELY, and eject, and report.

Why is this a pile of nonsense? At what point do we draw the line when we do and do not penalize what a coach says? Several posts have stated phrases that coaches use that we ignore. I know that if/when I hear something akin to this, my red flag goes up and I make sure we as a crew are on the same page and on 'heightened alert'.
I gave an instance where I would toss the coach immediately, but the OP was more vague. Was the coach responding to a player who caught a cheap shot and was telling them to punch the player in the face if it happens again? Was the coaches team up and he was telling his players now was the time to "Punch them in the face" for the knockout? Is the coach exhorting his team to toughen up and punch the other team in the face defensively? Same to a player. All of these are phrases I have heard coaches use even though I think there are better phrases to use to get the point across.

[MD Longhorn]

Jud, first off ... if "Punch him in the face? (regardless of what happens beforehand) is not across your line, I strongly suggest that you redraw it. It's been stated above (and accurately) that just telling a kid to punch another kid is a crime in some places.

Second - it was really the rest of your post that was complete nonsense. You can't justify not giving a tech because the coach might disagree with you, and it would end being he-said-she-said. That's so far down the bottomless pit of absurdity, I can't even fathom thinking this way. ALL of your justifications for not Teeing this guy up and/or tossing him were nearly as absurd.

[Judtech]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Jud, first off ... if "Punch him in the face? (regardless of what happens beforehand) is not across your line, I strongly suggest that you redraw it. It's been stated above (and accurately) that just telling a kid to punch another kid is a crime in some places.

Second - it was really the rest of your post that was complete nonsense. You can't justify not giving a tech because the coach might disagree with you, and it would end being he-said-she-said. That's so far down the bottomless pit of absurdity, I can't even fathom thinking this way. ALL of your justifications for not Teeing this guy up and/or tossing him were nearly as absurd.

I am pretty happy with where my line is drawn. As for 'being a crime' one of the things you would have to prove would be that there was no other way to interpret that type of instruction. It can be easily proved that the phrase used can have multiple meanings depending on the situation. There was also no action based on the comments so you could not prove intent either. But I digress. Again, I don't like the terminology but you would be hard press to make it criminal
As for you second point, hopefully I clarified what I meant and why I said the 'he said/she said' thing. If not, I can try again.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Jud, first off ... if "Punch him in the face? (regardless of what happens beforehand) is not across your line, I strongly suggest that you redraw it. It's been stated above (and accurately) that just telling a kid to punch another kid is a crime in some places.

Second - it was really the rest of your post that was complete nonsense. You can't justify not giving a tech because the coach might disagree with you, and it would end being he-said-she-said. That's so far down the bottomless pit of absurdity, I can't even fathom thinking this way. ALL of your justifications for not Teeing this guy up and/or tossing him were nearly as absurd.

Amen, Mike.

We have the responsibility to make sure that the game is played in a safe enviroment that's completely free of threats, intimidation or any other crap like this. And if an official don't have the balls to take care of bidness, then he should be coaching, not officiating. We NEVER make any call out there while worrying if a coach might disagree with it.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Amen, Mike.

We have the responsibility to make sure that the game is played in a safe enviroment that's completely free of threats, intimidation or any other crap like this. And if an official don't have the balls to take care of bidness, then he should be coaching, not officiating. We NEVER make any call out there while worrying if a coach might disagree with it.

Good thing, or I'd think I didn't do a very good job last night.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Good thing, or I'd think I didn't do a very good job last night.

Somehow, I think that you didn't spend very much time worrying about what the coach mighta thought of you or your calls.

The guy in the mirror is the guy that you have to keep happy. And some people have to learn that.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Judtech

Why is this a pile of nonsense? At what point do we draw the line when we do and do not penalize what a coach says? Several posts have stated phrases that coaches use that we ignore. I know that if/when I hear something akin to this, my red flag goes up and I make sure we as a crew are on the same page and on 'heightened alert'.
I gave an instance where I would toss the coach immediately, but the OP was more vague. Was the coach responding to a player who caught a cheap shot and was telling them to punch the player in the face if it happens again? Was the coaches team up and he was telling his players now was the time to "Punch them in the face" for the knockout? Is the coach exhorting his team to toughen up and punch the other team in the face defensively? Same to a player. All of these are phrases I have heard coaches use even though I think there are better phrases to use to get the point across.

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

NF rules. During a dead ball, Coach A loudly tells A1 to punch B1 in the face and you hear this. A1 does so. Do you have a flagrant technical only on Coach A, only on A1 or do you call one on each? Do you agree any foul(s) should be a flagrant?

I don't think there's much ambiguity here. I've never heard a coach use "punch in the face" as a euphemism for "finish them off." Further, specifying the request to punch a specific player (B1) pretty much removes any ambiguity you might have felt was present.
Personally, if I think it might be some sort of poorly chosen euphemism, I might consider a regular T. But the way the OP is presented, the coach is done.

Consider it this way, by tossing the coach you're making it clear that his actions and words aren't going to be tolerated, and you're making it significantly less likely that A1 will follow his coach's directive.

Again, I won't say it's automatic, but I can't imagine a scenario where this doesn't get a flagrant T in my game.