What are "we" telling coaches?
 

In the past week of varsity games I have been told by 3 different coaches that they have never heard that the defender doesn't have to be "set" to take a charge. I know I am going to hear that I shouldn't believe what they are saying, but in all honesty, I believe them. They think the defender needs to be set to take a charge. I explain legal guarding position and all that, and they look like a deer in headlights.

What are other refs telling coaches? Why is this such a difficult concept to understand?

Are you saying that coaches are telling you this based on what officials are telling them?

I do not tell coaches anything but that they were in LGP or they were not in LGP. Even if they try to tell me that a player was set or not, I then ask them, "What does set have to do with LGP?" There is a different concept of understanding because coaches never pick up a rulebook and do what most that played and coach do, go by what they think the rule is rather than what is the actual rules wording. I have even heard TV commentators use the term LGP and not explain the rule correctly. Sorry, but coaches think a lot of things without us telling them anything.

Peace

I never use the word set when talking about charge/block, i only use LGP. And yes, they are telling me they are being told by other officials that players are set or not.

Then believe them. That is your choice. But I do not believe most of what comes out of their coach's mouths as I have asked them specifically and when you talk to the official there is a different story. Life is about choices man. ;)

Peace

Coaches lie, especially about what another officials supposedly told them.

+1

And that is why you should always get both sides, folks.

+1. As noted previously, this erroneous information has been passed on to a coaching staff I am familiar with. Along with all sorts of interesting "interpretations".

Real simple: "The defender got there" or "he didn't get there". You can add an "I don't believe he got there" or "I believe he got there" if that helps manage the reaction. Coaches get that, and there is no other place for them to go with that line except to T-Ville. It's the same as "I disagree." It ends all legitimate conversation as nicely as possible from our end.

Assuming That's It's Not An Airborne Shooter ...
 

Got where? I think that the phrase "got there" implies that the defender can't move. Keep in mind that once he gets "there", he's allowed to move in several directions: backward, diagonally backward and to the left, diagonally backward and to the right, left, and right. And we can add up to that list if you want to add a third dimension.

I've also had more than one coach look at me funny when I mention "LGP." That doesn't mean you should quit trying.

Keep fighting the good fight with the correct terminology. The more that do it, the more likely everyone will be on the same page.

what they've been told and what they've heard are often two separate things.

I don't question the questionable interpretations that get passed to coaches over the years. I do, however, question his statement that he's "never" heard about LGP.

I will go with that. But I also have heard OFFICIALS say they have never heard of it either!! Honestly, you should see some of the looks the Mrs gets when she asks "Why did you think she was not in LGP?" :D

This is at least somewhat true. I hear fellow officials talk about "over the back", "reaching", and "He wasn't set" all the time. I also see other officials move all the players behind the division line during technical FTs, among other things.

This is what I am talking about.