Ejection ...

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Is this really necessary? If 21 has to go out, and a sub is there, that sub is for 21. The coach is free to then send another sub if he wishes.

Why is that sub for the dq'ed player? The coach has an allotted amount of time to sub for the dq'ed player, and just assuming - or forcing as it seems you would do - a sub who is already at the table is for the dq'ed player set your crew up for some problems.

Follow the mechanic. Inform the coach (in a very clear manner), inform the player...if there is a sub, ask the question. If the answer is yes, bring the sub in and away we go. If the answer is no, start the time.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Why is that sub for the dq'ed player? The coach has an allotted amount of time to sub for the dq'ed player, and just assuming - or forcing as it seems you would do - a sub who is already at the table is for the dq'ed player set your crew up for some problems.

Because the dq'ed player is the one who has to leave. The official is required to notify the coach of the disqualification. The coach is required to replace the disqualified player. Is anything else required? If, upon notification, a sub is already standing ready to enter, it seems like a situation that will work itself out from there. Asking
"Is he for the dq'ed player?" seems likely to provoke a hostile or sarcastic response.

"Who the hell else would he be for?!"

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Because the dq'ed player is the one who has to leave. The official is required to notify the coach of the disqualification. The coach is required to replace the disqualified player. Is anything else required? If, upon notification, a sub is already standing ready to enter, it seems like a situation that will work itself out from there. Asking
"Is he for the dq'ed player?" seems likely to provoke a hostile or sarcastic response.

"Who the hell else would he be for?!"

I've always asked the question when there's a sub there, and I've never had the response you suggest. If I did, we'd be shooting an extra set of free throws.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by just another ref

"Who the hell else would he be for?!"

Whoever the hell else the coach wanted out of the game before the foul was called.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Because the dq'ed player is the one who has to leave. The official is required to notify the coach of the disqualification. The coach is required to replace the disqualified player. Is anything else required? If, upon notification, a sub is already standing ready to enter, it seems like a situation that will work itself out from there. Asking
"Is he for the dq'ed player?" seems likely to provoke a hostile or sarcastic response.

"Who the hell else would he be for?!"

Just because #11 had 5 fouls doesn't mean the sub that was ALREADY at the table is for #11.

[tref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Just because #11 had 5 fouls doesn't mean the sub that was ALREADY at the table is for #11.

Exactly! That is why it makes sense to ASK the question:

Official: "Is the sub for 11, he has 5, COACH."
Coach: "Yes" or "No"

As opposed to TELLING the coach something he most likely ALREADY knows (if you work higher level games):

Official: "11 has 5 fouls, COACH."
Coach: "You dont say!" or "Yeah, thats why my sub is sitting there genius."

In my opinion (if we are allowed to have one w/out being crucified) it shows that you are truly managing the ballgame by ASKING the question (to the COACH).

Personally, I like to ask COACHES direct questions to get short, direct answers. Going to coaches with vague statements can lead to additional conversation that increases the chances of doing paperwork.

I see some officials understood exactly what I meant, but hey, big picture officiating aint for everybody! Some of us just run up & down the court, blowing the whistle, obviously.

[tref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Whoever the hell else the coach wanted out of the game before the foul was called.

The exceptional official can chew bubblegum & walk at the same time. He/she tries to be aware when subs are:

1. Headed to the table during live play.
2. When they are already at the table prior to the whistle.
3. When they sprint to the table after a whistle.

The game within the game!

[just another ref]

Information must be given.

done

We must have a sub.

done

I'd just rather let the coach work out the additional details. It's never been a problem for me before.

I actually had a situation where a partner went overboard dealing with this very situation.

Coach fails to replace dq'ed player

[Adam]

He didn't go overboard, he underperformed, IMO, by not asking the coach; per the NFHS ruling which you seem to be ignoring here.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by tref

The exceptional official can chew bubblegum & walk at the same time. He/she tries to be aware when subs are:

1. Headed to the table during live play.
2. When they are already at the table prior to the whistle.
3. When they sprint to the table after a whistle.

The game within the game!

Agreed -- and wasn't the OP where "the sub was already at the table?"

Even if it's your item 3, I confirm it (not "are you for #21?" but "you're for #21, right?")

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by tref

but hey, big picture officiating aint for everybody!

You are correct. It's not. And the ones with egos bigger than their abilities usually find that out the hard way.

As far as asking the Coach a question rather than telling the coach a player is dq'ed - fine. Go for it. It will work most of the time. When it doesn't, it will get ugly and will be a learning experience.

[rockyroad]

JAR - you cannot assume that the Coach wants that sub in for the dq'ed player. Especially if that sub is already at the table.

[tref]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

You are correct. It's not. And the ones with egos bigger than their abilities usually find that out the hard way.

As far as asking the Coach a question rather than telling the coach a player is dq'ed - fine. Go for it. It will work most of the time. When it doesn't, it will get ugly and will be a learning experience.

Yeah I see it every fall rockyroad, they used to walk tall & belittle others because they were good friends with such & such and got the opportunity to work NCAA ball, now they're back fighting to get the good HS games
Since that lil jab was directed at me, for the record my mindset is:
1. Game
2. Partner
3. Myself
I only throw resumes around when internet thugs belittle me.

Well, thanks for your approval sir! I feel so much better now that you've checked off on what works for me. ROTFLMAO

Isnt learning what it's all about?

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by tref

Since that lil jab was directed at me,

Actually it really wasn't directed at you personally....more directed at the attitude you were "displaying".

And of course learning is what it is all about. Always. And there are lots of things to learn from the discussions on this board.

And not very many people on this board really give a rat's a$$ about anyone's resume - including their own.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by tref

Well, thanks for your approval sir! I feel so much better now that you've checked off on what works for me. ROTFLMAO

In my experience, people that type their own joke and ROTF or LOL are the same guy as the annoying guffawing buffoon making everyone else uncomfortable or annoyed at the family picnics and post-season parties.