Ejection ...
 

I have a very long fuse when it comes to coaches. Maybe a couple of technical fouls each season, only one ejection that I can recall in twenty-nine years. I've been to the rodeo a few times, the coaches know me, and seem to respect me. Maybe my gray hair makes me seem wiser than my years.

Last night. Nutmeg Games. Our Connecticut "Olympic-style" summer sports festival. High school age game. First game was in the secondary gym, ended on time. Walked up to the primary gym for our second game to see that they were fifteen minutes behind schedule. My partner and I watched in horror as the game before ours went into two overtimes.

Finally start our 8:00 p.m. game at around 9:00 p.m. Nice game. The Red Team is a step faster, and an inch taller, than the White Team. The Red Team moves out to a comfortable lead early in the game. Neither coach is complaining about calls. The Red coach is standing and coaching in his coaching box the entire game. The White coach is just sitting on his bench sending subs in and out of the game. Kids are reacting well to our calls and noncalls. No problems with game management until there's only forty-five seconds left in the game.

Foul on White 11. I report it to the table. Table informs me that it is 11's fifth foul. I inform White coach that 11 has five fouls. White Coach informs me that he already knows and has a sub available at the table and adds that we should have called a foul on Red previous to 11's foul. I simply state "That's enough coach", while giving a non-threatening "stop sign". In twenty-nine years this technique has worked for me 99.5% of the time.

Not this time. He continues that my partner and I have been doing a lousy job all night. Keep in mind that up until this point he hasn't said a single word to me or my partner. He's down 30 points with 45 seconds to go in the game. I guess he didn't understand what "enough" meant, so I charge him with a technical foul, figuring that it will shut him up.

I figured wrong. He continues to complain about the officiating in general, and the technical foul specifically. Will not shut up. So I charge him with his second technical foul, at which point he sits down, unaware that the second technical is an automatic ejection. I ask him to leave the gym, which he does so begrudgingly. Now he can't coach his kids in the next game.

45 seconds left. 30 point game. 100% easy game up until that point. What got into this guy's head? On the way home, at 10:30 p.m., I'm thinking about my ejection report that I have to phone into my assistant assigner. At that point I realize that this coach never swore, at me, or my partner, and, in fact, never even called either of us a name.

Has anyone ever had a game get so bad, so quick? As anybody ever ejected a coach who simply kept complaining after being asked to stop.

Now I have to figure out how I'm going to spend the $24.00 that I took home from this game. I better not spend it all in one place. I've got three more games on Thursday night, and two games on Saturday night. Then, maybe, I'll have enough money to buy that Corvette?

I think the ejection was warranted. If he was down 30 pts with 45 seconds to go and he wouldn't shut up, he may have wanted to be tossed. Unless he was some kind of rookie coach or just an a$$ in general (which judging from what you told us about his previous behavior, he didn't act like one) he knew what he was doing. I don't have a problem with you giving both t's either, but I do wonder where your partner was. Did you two pre-game what would happen in a situation like this?

I have no problem with the T's. I think after the first one I - personally - would have gotten as far away from the guy as possible, but that's just me. From your description, this was a Coach who "wanted" the T's but didn't know the rules enough to realize he would get ejected on the second one. Betcha that $24 you earned that he thought it took three to get tossed. What a maroon.:rolleyes:

Maybe he really didn't want to coach the next game.
I have been tempted before. :)

With only 0:45 left, I wouldn't have said anything to the coach. If he continued on, then yes. But if he really thought you and your P sucked, he should have said something earlier. He's just upset that he team was stapled.

He'll Eventually Learn ...
 

Good point. Rookie official. Did a nice job in both games, but to be honest with you, if he had come over to offer assistance, I would have gladly backed off to administer the free throws for the first technical foul. Maybe there would not have been a second technical charged, or at least, I wouldn't have had to charge both. Plus, it all happened so fast. It was all so surreal.

This is something that I have definitely been working on over the summer. I had a similar situation where I issued a T and definitely felt justified at the time and afterward. However, I still reflected on it as: what could I have responded to the coach with differently that could have diffused the situation?

For your play, I think the T and ejection seem warranted based on his reactions, but they just occurred at an awkward time in the game. Not that that matters, but game situation plays a role in how we respond to the initial comment by a coach. Obviously he vented after your initial response, more that he should have and got what he deserved. But was your initial response the best response you could have given, given that situation? I think we all try to avoid giving both T's in an ejection, especially back to back, but we cannot avoid everything. I certainly would think that a more experienced partner would come in and get you out of the situation, and have you be done with it after the first T. Most importantly though, I think with any game situation, we need to constantly be reflective and think if we handled that situation the best we could have.

I asked where he was for that reason. It's best to not have the same official give both technicals, but sometimes it cannot be helped like in your situation. Good job handling it.

So chances are, he's probably not a HS or regular season coach who has a feel for where the line is or even understands that the stop sign is there for his benefit. That's what I run into with AAU or other non Fed summer coaches. Probably a player's father who agreed to coach the local HS team because the regular coach is on vacation.

Don't beat yourself up over it. You've probably analyzed the whole exchange more than he has. He's likely bragging to his buddies that he got tossed at the Nutmeg Games.

Think of it as a teaching experience for him. If his team is still around in two days, he'll know better next time.

p.s. I have an old Vette. The money I make from summer ball almost pays for the gas in it :)

I totally disagree with your "with only :45 left" philosophy. If a coach wants a technical foul give him one, and it seems by all accounts he wanted one. You told him enough and gave him the stop sign and he ran right through it. Then he didn't stop after the first technical foul so the second one was warranted. I am not going to let a coach "own" the last minute of a game just because I don't want to do some paperwork or make the game last an extra 5 minutes. You launch him, he sits next game and hopefully this knucklehead gets a clue.

We have veteran officials that don't know how to manage a game or the coaches why would we expect this out of a rookie official...it might have gotten worse if he would have helped you out.

Not A Clue ...
 

Bingo. We have a winner. In Connecticut, high school coaches aren't allowed to coach their players during the off-season.

We have veteran officials that brag that they haven't called a technical foul in 25 years. I can only imagine the nonsense that they put up with.

Correct...if they didn't want us to call technical fouls they wouldn't have put them in the rulebook!

Or make them so fun to give out.

OK I don't normally think that but... ;)

Billy, sounds like the coach was more frustrated with his team than anything and he just took it out on the stand-by boogiemen.

Nowhere in the OP was it mentioned that the HC was belligerent, yelling, screaming, persistent, personal, profane, etc.

A coach who wants a T would not wait until 0:45 left in a 30-point blowout.

I don't see at how this HC wanted a T. He wanted a foul on Red. That's it. If I said anything, I would have said "Understood coach." Trust me, that would have satisfied him. Then nothing more comes of the situation.

I think that using the stop sign, you created more paperwork for yourself. If you think that a coach "owned" the last minute of a 30-point blowout because he finally spoke up and said that Red committed a foul first, then you need thicker skin.

As I am now moving into my 4th season, I have had the "help or don't help" your partner post-T come up a few times, mainly in 3 whistle.

First of all, I hope I can recognize the veteran partner who can handle a game... and if he whacks a coach, I am not immediately coming over to bail him out. I will simply watch and if things get worse, I will come over and try to stay in my partner's line of vision to see if he gives me the "I got it" sign, at which point I will go somewhere else and begin to gather players and ID a shooter for the free throws.

Of course, we don't always get to pregame during the off season, and I am sure that a school game during the season will have this as part of our pregame.

I just think it looks bad if the partner of an obviously experienced (and capable) official comes running to the rescue because the mechanic says to come get your partner away from the coach... chances are, the vet will take care of business, spin on his heel and begin to move away-- which is my signal to come finish up over there and get things moving again... If he's still there and things are not getting worse, I'm not coming to get him.

If the crew is all about the same experience level, I'll move a little quicker, but again, I'm going to see how my partner handles it. If it's me doing the whacking, I don't run immediately away, but I don't sit and wait for conversation either. Whack, report, turn and begin moving away

Z

I'm with the Juggler on this one. 0:45 left in the game, coach hasn't been a problem all game? An "I'll watch that, Coach" should be sufficient to handle the situation.

But there are no magic bullets and if the coach is tired, cranky and really just needs his wittle blankee and a nap, he may well have continued on like he did. You may still have had to toss him. But if were me, I'd feel better about the situation if my first response had been more neutral.

Just my $0.02

Billy, I'm with Juggs and BITS on this one. In that particular scenario I would not have said "that's enough coach". I think an "I hear you" or "you may be right" or something to that effect would have fit better for this particular situation.

I have no problem with tossing the coach at any point in the game if he earned it.

+1

IMO, the only way the stop sign works is if the coaches are well versed in its use. What you did was use it on a Dad who's probably seen his son use it a few times; how well do you think he took it?

It's not a universal stop sign, it's a universal "whatever" sign that happens to be used in some areas as a warning in a basketball game. Guess which one Dad sees when you use it?

Billy:

The only thing that I might suggest that you could have done differently is that with only 45 seconds left in a blowout is to just ingnore W-HC's first comment and get the ball back into play. I know I can't believe that I am giving this particular type of advice, but any response from you, while non-threatening and non-baiting, was like adding gasoline to a fire as far as W-HC was concerned.

MTD, Sr.

Billy if I recall correctly, you're an IAABO official, right?
Don't you guys practice getting with a partner on Ts before taking it to the table?

In addition to not getting procedures wrong, I think it helps get us away from the coach. And if they continue as in your sitch, now your partner gets to toss him.

As others have mentioned, I think your response may have fueled the fire.
When a team is getting smashed & coach wants to spout off at the end of the game, I generally go with "I hear you, coach" as opposed to "that's enough, coach." JMO

Like I Already Said, It Was Surreal ...
 

Point taken. I would sure go this route if I could have a do-over. But it just happened so damn fast, and it was totally unexpected.

The coach complained. The official gives a simple, non-confrontational warning about continuing the complaining. The coach then completely ignores that warning and continues to complain.

And then some people complain that you acted hastily. To them I say "whatinthehell do you people want Billy to do in a situation like that?" How many warnings should a coach get before we do something about it? How many warning do you think should be given before you'll actually do something about them? Why warn in the first place if you have no intention of following up with that warning?

Righteous "T", Billy. The coach left you no choice by ignoring your warning. All you did was react to what the coach did, and the coach really left you no choice imo. And it doesn't matter either if it's in the last 5 seconds of the game or the first 5 seconds of the game. You penalize the act! Period!

Some officials can always find a reason NOT to call a technical foul.

And if the coach continues to complain after you tell him "I hear you, coach"...as the coach in Billy's sitch did....what then do you and the others do next? Warn him again? Ignore him?

Telling an official that he and his partner had done a lousy job all night ISN'T personal?

That startement is derogatory and demeaning. Every official sets their own limits, but I personally will never let a coach get away with a comment like that.

Absolutely, and some officials dont have the communication skills or common sense to handle the issue before it gets to the warning &/or T stage. :rolleyes:

Then I'd say "coach that's enough" communicate that to my partners & that will serve as his 1 and only official warning.

BTW "I hear you, coach" isnt an official warning in these parts!
I dont ignore coaches... I'm giving a verbal or non-verbal answer, they just want to know if we hear them, most times.

I agree with the Jurassic one on this. Especially with 45 seconds to go. Don't give the guy a free pass on a parting shot where he said that he thought the crew did a poor job all night. He is expecting to get away with it BECAUSE he is down 30.

Most coaches are smart enough not to use one of those magic words when they complain.

If I'm not mistaken, the coach made that comment AFTER receiving his initial T.
I didn't even comment on the second one. I only spoke on the first verbal exchange where Billy said 'that's enough coach" while giving the stop sign.

IMO there are going to be some very long nights & excess paperwork if we give a stop sign to every coach that questions a call only once.

There is a difference between (i) "I hear you, coach" with no stop sign signal and (ii) "That's enough coach" with a stop sign.

IF the head coach were to continue after the official saying "I hear you, coach", THEN appropriate action would be taken by the official.

The sign of a fantastic official is to diffuse a situation so that it doesn't blow up. There was no opportunity of that happening in the OP.

There's a quote in Canadian football that goes like this: "the official who, through the influence of his presence, causes players to avoid rule violations has attained the perfect relationship to the game."

Certainly the quote applies to coaches as well. And there's no reason it doesn't apply to basketball as well, including basketball coaches.

The official's presence is in what he says, how he says, and his body language of how he expects the game to proceed.

Neither would I.

But you've taken what I said out of context. To make myself clear: there was nothing in the initial coach's comment that required an aggressive handling technique by the official.

You are mistaken. The coach got his initial "T" for telling Billy that he and his partner had done a lousy job all night. And he made that derogatory comment to Billy AFTER being warned. And AFTER getting his first "T" for making that derogatory comment, that coach then continued to complain and refused to shut up, earning himself the second "T".

Hey, if you want to ignore crap like that, be my guest.

If a coach makes a comment to you, as in Billy's sitch, you have 3 options. You can ignore the comment, issue a warning or hand out an immediate "T". And the option that you choose depends solely on your personal tolerance level. And I don't have a problem with that either; that's the way it should be. Pick what you think is best for that situation. But, big "but", if you do warn someone, then you HAVE to damnwell do something if the person that was warned simply ignores that warning and continues doing what he was just warned to stop doing.

If you want to ignore comments, fine. As I said, I don't have a problem with that; it's a personal choice dependant on the behavioral line that each individual official sets. But if you do warn someone, then you HAVE to follow through if that warning is ignored. That's my point. And that's why I think that Billy was completely justified in handing out the first technical foul. He chose to warn the coach(in a fairly benign, non-threatening innocuous manner btw). The coach ignored the warning and made a personal and derogatory remark. Billy had no choice imo but to follow through with his warning.

And to make myself clear, that is up to the calling official. The calling official decides what is the best thing to do at that point of time in a game. Billy, the calling official, decided that a warning was his best option. I refuse to second-guess Billy for choosing to do so, as I also wouldn't second-guess you for choosing to ignore the comment under the same circumstances. The course of action depends on each individual official's level of tolerance.

What bothers me though is the people that think a coach should get be able to get away with a personal, derogatory remark at an official AFTER they have been warned. If they're not going to follow up on a warning, whatinthehell is the use of giving out that warning in the first place?

1) Oh? And pray tell, whatinthehell is the difference? I sureasheck can't see one. In both cases, you're basically telling the coach that enough is enough. And in Billy's case, the head coach sureashell did continue. He told Billy that "my partner and I were doing a lousy job all night.". If Billy chose to ignore that, he shouldn't have said anything in the first place.

What are you going to do if the coach makes that same personal comment to you after you said "I hear you, coach"? Ignore it? If you do, may I suggest that you should turn in your "fantastic official" badge. :)

Taking care of bidness doesn't equate to a situation blowing up. We just react to the crap that comes our way. At least we should imo.

Incorrect.

In the first case, the official is using a tool to deflate the situation. Understand the psychology of the coach: he simply wants to be heard. By the official acknowledging that he is aware of the coach's belief, he can avoid any esculation. By using a tool that brings attention to himself, ie. the stop sign, the official is telling the coach that his opinion doesn't matter. As true as that is, the coach thinking that his opinion does matter means that the game is over without incident.

Liken it to "get in, get done, get out".

At this point, I deal with the coach in a different manner. I certainly don't ignore it. Why would you think I would though, since I didn't ignore a lesser comment? Besides, I don't want to have to take my IAAFO badge off. ;)

Taking care of bidness means giving a T when it is warranted, and avoiding it when possible.

Let me put my thoughts this way; as it played out, I have no problem with either T.
My comments here are strictly regarding the dreaded stop sign. There has been considerable debate on here whether the stop sign works or makes things worse. I've used it successfully on players, and I've used it unsuccessfully on coaches (followed almost immediately by a T).

Those who use it successfully have, almost unanimously, stated that it's an understood and accepted (even prescribed) mechanic in their areas; meaning the coaches are used to it as well and understand what it means. That makes sense to me (although I hate the crap about being able to see the whole thing on tape.) Summer ball, though, is not the time to use a signal that means one thing to regular season basketball coaches and something completely different to parents of teenagers. JMO, of course.

I agree with you Juggling. The two actions have entirely different meanings. "I hear you" is simply an acknowledgment that you've taken note of what the coach said (even if you promptly forget about it). It is not an instruction to the coach to stop....maybe an implied suggestion but nothing more. "That's enough coach" is a direct and clear instruction for the coach to cease whatever they're doing. I don't think I'd ever T a coach for saying something after "I hear you" unless what they say warrants the T all on its own.

Huh
 

In the moment, of course it's up to the calling official. But Billy chose to bring it here, presumably to get our thoughts on it. Which we've done. Refusing to second-guess an official is a great quality in an assigner. However, it's a useless quality on a forum like this.

Perhaps I need to re-read this thread, but I don't recall anyone suggesting that the coach should be able to get away with anything, or that we shouldn't take care of business. Several of us suggested alternative responses we felt were less confrontational and that might have avoided an objectionable response from the coach. Might have. Perhaps. Maybe. But I don't recall any of us suggesting that we ignore the coach's insulting remarks.

Um, aren't all of you kinda forgetting that the damn coach was complaining about the officials missing a call? Whatinthehell does that have to do with the coach having an opinion that doesn't matter. The coach's opinion was that you missed a call. Period. And now he's complaining about you missing that call. Where does it say that the official now has to worry about the poor widdle coach's feelings?

The bottom line is whether you choose to ignore a coach complaining or do you do something about it. And that option is up to the calling official only.

Once the coach complains, you have 3 options....ignore the complaint, warn the coach about continuing to complain or deal with the complaining immediately with a "T". If you choose to warn the coach, the idea is to tell the coach that he's ALREADY had his say and that's enough. And if you can't tell that coach that he's had his say by simply raising your hand in a non-confrontational manner and saying "that's enough, coach", we might as well forget about trying to keep any game under a modicum of control and just sit back and let everybody do what they want to do. That act is about as innocuous as you can get.

Any escalation after receiving a warning about complaining about a call is solely up to the coach. If he wants to ignore a warning, he then deserves everything that he gets. And if an official wants to issue a warning and then refuses to follow up on that warning when a coach ignores it, then that official deserves everything that he gets also.

Every time you blow your whistle, you bring attention to yourself. If you want to stop a coach complaining, you have to bring attention to yourself in some way to do so. Thinking otherwise is just patently ridiculous imo.

Lah me......"he simply wants to be heard" :rolleyes: Of course he wants to be heard. That's why he's COMPLAINING!!!!

And note that I am not saying that one way is better than another. Whatever works for you is the best way. I am saying though that imo there is nothing the matter with the way that Billy handled the coach's complaints. He warned the coach about continuing to complain and then he did something about it when the coach refused to heed his warning.

We can argue the "I would have done it this way" or the "Stop sign vs. not" stuff all summer...the bottom line here is that the Coach made an inappropriate comment which was addressed by the Official. The Coach continued to make inappropriate comments and was assessed a T. The Coach CONTINUED to make inappropriate comments and got a second T and ejection. End of story.

As I said earlier in this thread, after the first T I am going over to my partner - rookie or no - to have a discussion about what we are going to do. Get as far away as possible. But if he/she keeps it up, I will give him/her the second T. And this Coach absolutely deserved both of them. The rest of this whole thread is just arguing over style points.

+1


If I may add to your valid points, I believe that where the hand is located plays a huge part in the coaches reaction as well.
We cant just stick our hand in a grown mans face & expect him not to blow up!! I've seen the stop sign work effectively when given 4'-5' away & waist level.


Neither do I!

Take care of business AT ALL TIMES, but manage the game within the game through effective communication tools to minimize potential flare-ups!

I guess that sorta game management isnt for everyone...

And the above is basically all that I've been trying to say.

Billy, no knock on you &/or how you handled your situation. Anybody could be a backseat driver! Madd respect for you & the rules knowledge you've blessed me with over the years!
My thoughts were based on your question, "Has anybody ever have a game go so bad, so quick?"

JR, all I've been trying to say is:

IMO that begins the flash point right there. Sorta like asking a coach if its a full or 30 second t/o late in the 4th Q when he's been out of 30s since the 2nd Q :rolleyes: You don't think he's gonna have something smart to say?

The game within the game! Know your surroundings, see the sub at the table & converse accordingly. ie: "Is the sub for 11, he has 5."
Since little hinges swing big doors, perhaps wording it that way could have eliminated the following:

My point was, if a team is getting hammered & they have a player foul out in a EOG situation & we go tell the coach something (11 has 5 fouls) that he has already taken care of... he gets to chirp about a call he thinks he should've got!
I hear you, coach instead of that's enough coach w/stop sign could've minimized the chances of Ts being thrown... especially when he hadn't said a word all game. OR maybe not, but putting ourselves in the best position to difuse situations as opposed to pouring gasoline on it is always better. Wouldn't ya say?

If I "that's enoughed w/stop sign" every coach who said, "there was a foul on them before we fouled" there would be alot of assistants getting their opportunity. Because once we give that stop sign, we have got to take care of business on the next negative interaction. Cant take it back!

So, um, let me get this straight, you would purposely avoid your responsibility under 2-8-4, just so you can keep the coach from saying some smart comment? Isn't that effectively having the coach control you, and your actions? When does White 11 become disqualified? Under your scenario, never, per 4-14-2.

Billy did exactly what he was supposed to do, which was inform the coach that player had 5 fouls. The coach continued to act inappropriately, and was penalized accordingly. Like rocky said, we can argue style points all day, but what Billy did was correct. And what the coach did had nothing to do with being informed #11 had 5 fouls.

(In my best Archie Bunker voice) Jeeeezzzz!!

Umm NO, sorry, never said THAT!
What I did say, in plain english mind you, was,
ie: "Is the sub for 11, he has 5."
Does that not fulfill our responsiblities??

I never said Billy did anything incorrect, excuse me if I'm wrong, but I thought we were in the business of improving day to day by thinking things through AFTER the game. Like, how could I have handled this better??

Ok, I wasn't entirely clear you were talking to the coach, rather than the table.

As far as what Billy said, I still see absolutely nothing wrong with what he told the coach. He certainly didn't say, "Hey, coach, #11's an idiot and needs to come out and sit next to the other idiots on the bench." In other words, I don't see where he said anything that could be construed as confrontational or demeaning, but rather professional and straight-to-the-point.

Sometimes something happens in the game that is totally outside our control, no matter what we do. Perhaps the coach was upset with a player not running a play correctly (for the 5th time that game), and it's the son of the school board president, which is why he took it out on Billy instead of the kid. Since the coach was a parent or volunteer, that person probably didn't understand the meaning of sportsmanship, and decided he wanted to "show the players he had their back"? Who cares if the stop sign sign didn't work? No matter what, the coach was wrong in their actions, and Billy did what was necessary. It wasn't Billy's fault the coach didn't understand the limits, and it's not our job to inform them or handle them any differently than if it was an actual coach.

It would be nice if there was some magic formula of words and actions that work every time to keep all our games under control. Unfortunately, there aren't, so it's best if we stick with the prescribed mechanics and rules.

Concur! In addition to prescribed mechanics & rules, common sense!

Let me go s l o w so nobody gets confused or misconstrue what I'm saying :D

1. I report the foul to the table

2. They inform me that its the 5th.

3. Im AT the table & see a sub there... no reason to let the coach know its the 5th. Thats why the sub is there!! Asking if the sub is for the player w/ 5 makes more sense to me.

4. It eliminates the coach saying:
"I already KNOW & there is a SUB at the table" which really means "Thats why theres a guy at the table, you idiot! And since you're an idiot let me tell you about that foul on THEM before you decided to blow your whistle."

Which was my point about asking a coach "full or 30" late in the game when they havent had a 30 since before halftime. Ever hear the smartass comments they make in those situations, especially if theyre losing??

It only took me 1 time to learn to pay attention to all the details of the game within the game & utilize the table crew to assist. I asked a coach that a few years back & he flipped on me, "We used (2) 30s in the 1st frickin Q, what game are you working?"
Now my table informs the crew when a team is out of a particular t/o.

Personally, I like to reflect on situations where I get pushback & think about:
1. What caused it?
2. How I could've handled it better?
3. What will I do different next time it happens?

But as you said sometimes sh!t is just gonna happen.

1) Why does any coach get to chirp about a call that he thinks he should've got? The rules explicitly say that he doesn't have the right to do that. I know there's real life, but coaches whining sureashell isn't a God-given right. He might get to chirp but I also get to tell him to stop his damn chirping.

2) And you're still missing my point. I really don't care what approach you take with the coach after his initial complaint. Personally, I have no problem with a warning but if you want to try something different than a warning and it works for you, hey, obviously your way is fine also. But if you do warn as Billy did in the original post, then I strongly believe that Billy had no choice but to do what he had to do dependant on subsequent events. All Billy did was react to the coach's refusal to shut up.

And to be quite honest, I also personally believe from a whole bunch of experience that saying "I hear you" wouldn't have changed anything in a situation like this. The coach had already made up his mind that he was going to get his complaints on the record and he really could care less at this point what you were saying to him. He's not really listening to you anyway. Either way, he's either going to make the complaint once to you and drop it or he's going to run with it and see how you react. He chose door #2 in this case and he went out that door because of his choice.

Follow the mechanics :D

Absolutely!

Point taken JR! With 45 seconds left & coach on his best behavior throughout the contest I'll choose to go with one of the following:
1. Ignore his whining STATEMENT
2. Nod yes.
3. I hear ya, coach
4. Hell, I might even stroke his ego & say, "You're right coach, I must've missed it. Will you send me the tape?"

Hahaha who gives a damn, its Miller time in 45 seconds...

Also, I believe the exceptional official responds vs. reacting to situations.

Let me go slow also so that you don't misconstrue what I'm saying.:D

There is a damn good reason to let the coach know that his player just committed his fifth foul. And that reason is that the prescribed mechanics and rules tell you that it's the correct procedure to follow. M&M already gave you the rule that backs that up. Imo your version of "common sense" is telling you to ignore the prescribed rule and mechanic in order to keep away from the coach in case he might complain to you. That ain't game management; that's just making up an excuse to avoid a possible confrontation.

Just do your job and take care of what comes up. If something happens, deal with it.

As usual, jmo.

That's not applicable 'round here :D Only the cowardly wants their partner to finish their business :D

And even though I'm on my rules, I'm not a rulebook official! Its a people business & that aint taught in no rulebook... gotta be born with it OR learn to do it. :D :cool:

ie: "Is the sub for 11, he has 5."

Does that not fulfill our responsiblities??

Never seen so many people, in one place at one time with such a lack of reading comprehension skills. And to think some of you are decision makers :(

Now this is getting interesting.

http://www.cyclonefanatic.com/galler...0/1/1/1974.gif

You still need to inform the coach that 11 has 5 fouls. While the sub may well be for 11, the coach may not be aware he has 5 fouls. Later on in the game he may try to insert 11 back into the game not knowing he has 5 fouls, and when 11 is not allowed back in because of his fouling out, the coach is going to be even more mad that you didn't let him know his player had 5. That will probably lead to a bigger confrontation than the one you're trying to avoid with him fouling out. Suck it up, and just tell the coach he has 5. JMO

While it may be customary to finish what you started in your back yard, which I am fine with, the situation might not have evolved into an ejection by using the recommended mechanic.

I know of assignors that would go back to the official and asked why the mechanic was not followed, there is a reason for them. But you are not a Rule Book official, yet you know the rules ... :confused:

The OP was looking for viable options, and this is just one.

Yes, officiating is a people business, there are just a lot of stoopid people...they are called coaches :D:D:D

"Is the sub for 11, he has 5."

Why not? Does he not understand English? Am I doing a FIBA game? Jeeezzz

"Is the sub for 11, he has 5."

Yeah okay... he brings that player back AFTER I tell him he has 5 & it becomes all too easy! WHACK!
BTW, nowadays the player would tell the coach he is not going back in the game with 20 seconds left down by 30+ :-)


For the last time, we dont get together on players fouling out! Only atypical situations.


Hmmmm I guess this is what the Twilight Zone feels like?

With a 5th foul, we typically pregame that the calling official will inform the coach, as he's already there at the table. If he senses pending issues, he can absolutely hand it off to a partner and switch.
It sounds like, in Billy's game, I would have informed him as the calling official as the coach had presumably been a peach all game. I also would have likely ignored the "you missed a foul" comment, assuming it's the first such comment all game.
However, if I warned him (always possible depending on many unknown variables), the T has to follow if he ignores the warning. Otherwise, you can be sure any coaches watching (and paying attention) will start working me at tip-off when I have their game.

I disagree, that statement is obviously directed towards the coach or it doesn't make any sense.
The table just told you it's five, so why would you tell the table the same thing? Personally, I normally ask the same question tref does here. You're fulfilling the responsibility while letting the coach know that you're paying attention. At the same time, coaches don't typically get snippy if I do it the other way; they just point to their sub and we move on.

You're right, just went back and re-read it again. My mistake :o

Hmm...

I asked why you feel it's not necessary to tell a coach it's a player's 5th foul, and you ask us about our comprehension skills? :confused:

Telling the coach about a player's 5th foul is not a courtesy, or something that should be avoided if it looks like the coach is about ready to look at you cross-eyed or say something to you. It's a requirement that has implications in the game.

Whenever I hear an official talk about using "common sense", more often than not they're talking about doing something their way, rather than following the rules, because somehow their way seems easier. And it's so easy to say "I don't want to be one of those officials.", like knowing and following the rules is somehow a bad thing. But, more often than not, the official that uses that line is one that doesn't really know the rules, and they're simply making things up as they go along.

No, it sureashell does NOT fulfill our responsibility. Our responsibility is to notify the coach, NOT to make a remark at the table. That is the rule and the prescribed mechanic.

It's you that seems to lack reading comprehension skills. All you have to do is read the freaking rule and then follow it.

Wow unFREAKINbelievable! Yeah, those 2 ^ ^

If I'm misreading the above, I apologize...but.....

It doesn't matter at all if the statement was obviously directed at the head coach. What matters is that the rules and mechanics state that you go to the head coach and inform him that his player just committed his fifth foul. If you don't do that, you haven't fulfilled your responsibility; you've completely ignored it. You sureashell are NOT fulfilling your responsibility in any way, shape or form by asking a question at the scorers table. The head coach is not supposed to be anywhere near the scorers table. That's a rule also.

OMG dont backpedal NOW!

That's one of the stupidest comments I have read on this board in a long time. So you are a "people person" but can't figure out that switching places is a valid way to calm a volatile situation? That's not much of a "people person". That's more of an "it's all about me person".

And the "Is the sub for 11, he has 5" statement is neither the proper way to handle the situation nor a very good way to communicate. A possible scenario:

tref: "Is the sub for #11, he has 5?"

coach: "What? That kid hasn't even been in the game yet?"

tref: "No, no, no, Coach. Number 11 has 5 fouls and I was wondering if the sub was coming in for number 11."

Coach: "Why didn't you just say that number 11 had five fouls! That's pretty much par for the course with the way you have been calling this game tonight."

Great game management there.

Just to make sure that you don't backpedal....

You're advocating above for officials to ignore a very plainly written rule and prescribed mechanic. And you can't see anything the matter with that either.

That just about says it all imo about your officiating "sense".....

But We Know That The French Judge Has Cheated Before ...
 

The French judge gave me a seven.

I call BS - don't they use metric? :D

Never thought your question would go 5 pages or more, did 'ya? ;)

Once again, WE DONT DO THAT HERE on 5th fouls! Handle your own business!! In the OP there was nothing volatile going on...
I dont have to try to outshine my partners, I illuminate naturally. Thats why I clocked in & got instant gratification. No 10+ years to get the big one over here. So get yours because I'm getting mine :rolleyes:

When I say that & it's rare that I call 5th fouls, but when I do my body language communicates to the HC exactly who I'm talking about.

Greatly appreciate your negative scenario! Thanks for playing! Now as you were :rolleyes:

So, let me get this straight - the reason you do it your way is because you "illuminate naturally", you clock in and get instant gratification, you're getting yours, and you do this all by communicating through body language?

Oh, ok. :rolleyes:

We are so close to that Southern California reference I mentioned in another thread, I can almost taste it.

Nah, the reason I do it THAT way (not MY way) is because our 3 big dogs do it that way & it works for me as well! I prefer to copy people at a level I desire to work at vs. people stuck at a level I'm already at.
So basically, if you're not the bank teller... dont tell me nothing!

Tref,you're not even close to the levels that M&M and rockyroad have already worked. And from your posting history, I doubt very much that you ever will get to those levels. When you've done a college Final Four(as one of the guys that you just dumped on has), feel free then to come back and talk down to everybody here.

It's a waste of time telling you anything.

1. Gracias!

2. I've NEVER dumped on anyone unless they dumped 1st.

3. Billy understood what I was saying loooong ago, but you & your illiterate computer goons came after me for expressing MY thoughts. Am I not to defend my position? (rhetorical question).

4. Of course it's a waste, for YOU arent the bank teller!

This particular poster is the pride of CO, not CA. The resemblance sureashell is there though, isn't it? Uncanny as hell. :)

Actually it will be TX in a couple of months...

You're right, and tref's statement, as I read it, is directed to the coach. If I'm reading it wrong, then I agree with you. However, the point is there's no prescribed wording for notifying the coach, nor is there anything that prevents us from asking the question, "is #5 the sub for #11" prior to stating, "that's 5 on #11."

I guess it seemed obvious to me that tref was simply proposing alternate wording to the notification rather than suggesting we speak to the basketball gods and assume coach hears us.

I think he was being sarcastic and referencing a prior thread.

This has been a silly arugment. tref offered a perfectly valid way of dealing with the situation.....not just tell the coach #11 has 5 but wrap it up into asking if the already present sub is for the player who has just fouled out.

In fact, it does something beneficial vs. just telling the coach "#11 has 5 fouls". It moves the topic directly to getting the sub into the game reducing the chance the coach will say something. It has shifted that information into a secondary part of the exchange with the status of the sub being the focus. Sure, the coach can still choose to say/do something that will draw a penalty...can't stop them all. But, it is a lot less likely than telling the coach the player has fouled out and waiting for him to tell you the sub that is already at the table is the replacement.

tref's method is killing two birds with one sentence.

A perfectly acceptable way to handle the situation. In fact, it should be encouraged because if that sub is for the fouled-out player, then the game gets moving quicker. if the sub isn't for the fouled-out player, he might "become" the sub for the fouled-out player because the idea is now in the coach's mind.

Case book play 2.8.4 lays out the procedure and that's exactly what we train our officials to follow. Asking extraneous questions at the table is completely irrelevant to the recommended prodecure though. Asking a sub at the table whether he's subbing in for a disqualified player is NOT notifying a coach under any stetch of the imagination.

If I'm right, tref's question was directed to the head coach.

Tref said that you don't have to tell the coach that his player fouled out. His statement was "there is no reason to tell the coach".. The rules say otherwise.

Howinthehell can you be right when tref stated very emphatically that there is no reason to let the coach know that his player just committed his fifth foul? Why would he direct it the head coach if he felt that their was no reason for the head coach to know that? Those were his exact words; i've cited 'em verbatim enough so far in this thread. He also said that he asked the question AT the table. Coachs aren't allowed to be at the table, by rule. Howinthehell can you direct a question to someone who by rule isn't supposed to be anywhere near you?

RIF!

Unfortunately, the rules state the we have to inform the coach when one of his players fouls out. That's NFHS rule 2-8-4. There is nowayinhell that asking anyone anything at the scorers table changes that responsibility.

Just to be clear, please tell me which post number where "tref stated very emphatically that there is no reason to let the coach know that his player just committed his fifth foul".

Thanks.

Cool. Ignore a very plainly written rule and case paly. If you think that's acceptable, Jugs, I'd be checking that out with your local rules interpreter before adopting that procedure. You're into making up your own rules now imo.

Tref's method does NOT include notifying the head coach that one of his players has just fouled out. That bird is live! He's stated that very emphatically and I've sureashell cited that statement enough. That is NOT acceptable. The rules state that we do have to notify the head coach.

The case book play that I cited lays out the procedure to be used very simply and easily. Why do some people think that they can ignore that and make up their own procedure? A procedure that goes completely against a written rule?

I'm just repeating myself now. I'm done.

For the umpteeth freaking time, Juggs......see above.

He's AT the table, nowhere near the coach. He's asking the question TO the table. The rules say that we HAVE to let the coach know that his player just committed their fifth foul. At no time did tref go down and do that. I have no idea howintheheck either how anyone can assume that the coach even heard the question when the coach isn't supposed to be anywhere near the table, by rule.

Blow things out of proportion much?

I had trouble searching through all of the replies, which is why I tasked you to find the quote tref said. I know you spend a lot of time on here, so you may as well spend more, rather than me. ;)

I did read somewhere that said voicing "Is so-and-so a sub for #x, who has 5" and thought it was tref. If it wasn't, I apologize.

I know that you know that I follow mechanics properly. As for my local rules interp, you're just trying to paint me with a colour that you know damn well isn't true, so you should just stop that sort of behavior.

Yes, and I also know that you know the rules better than the average bear also. That's why I was frankly quite amazed when you seemed to advocate not following the prescribed rule and mechanic. That's certainly out of character for you.

At no time did I intend to demean you or your rules knowledge in any way. If you thought so, then I apologize to you for giving that impression.

Canuck Speak ???
 

Metric spelling ???

JR, we are obviously reading tref's statement differently. Nothing in 2.8.4 states the wording that must be used, so if an official uses wording that both informs the coach of the player's fifth foul and inquires about the already waiting sub, I see nothing wrong with it. Nothing he said indicates he's talking to the sub, you're making that assumption. Nothing he said indicates he's talking to the table, you're making that assumption.

I went back and re-read the first half of the thread, including tref's statement you're quoting. Frankly, I think he simply misspoke on that statement, as EVERYTHING ELSE he wrote on the topic indicates he was talking to the coach when he asked the question followed by the "he has 5" statement.

How close do you teach your officials to get to the coach when they inform him it's 5? I'm curious, because quite a few times I've done it from a distance similar to the distance between the reporting area and the coaching box.

I get no closer than I need to. Often that is from the division line. I get eye contact and say verbally "#11 had 5 fouls" and I hold up the 5 fingers at the same time. I have had supervisors and observers at camps who teach that you should also confirm that any sub sent to the table is actually for the disqualified player.

The Bird Is The Word ...
 

Too bad we can't just hold up one finger. Guess which one.

Nice Signature ...
 

Sorry I'm late to the party: Rich, those vets don't have any trouble because they always choose games the night after you were in the gym! ;)

Im not a huge fan of my partner coming in to "save" me. If a coach wants to get into it with me I deal with it. If I do end up giving him a T, I do so and move away (since there is no reason to be table side anyways after the T was issued). If he insists on keeping at it he can follow me and earn that second one. But the last thing I need is my partner to come and rescue me. I am an adult, the coach is an adult and we are dealing with a game with fixed parameters.

Its not ideal for the same official to give both T's but I do not want my partner to give the second one simply because I was to afraid of how it would look.

I didn't mean to imply that your partner should always come in and "save" you. Sometimes it cannot be helped for an official give both T's. However, in some situations a second T can be prevented by getting away from the coach and letting your partner handle things. Not because you were "afraid" of how it would look to give both T's, but it's simply what's best for game management.

I have seen officials continue to engage a coach after giving a T just because their ego won't let their partner help them out. That is totally wrong and only makes things worse.

tref,

Don't worry about Jurassic Ref.This is just his schtick. He's an old timer who gets his kicks from finding one sentence or phrase he can take out of context in order to paint you in a bad light. It's like some sort of pathetic game he likes to play to make himself feel superior.

Those of us who actually know how to look at things in context know what you were trying to say with your "no reason" comment. I like your solution.