T or not T, that is the question?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Snaq,

The bottom line is I want context to judge if I am going to call these situations properly. If you do not want context then so be it. It is a rules violation to pull out your jersey on the court, but even for you that would not give a T in this situation if I read your comments correctly. It is clear to me that for you this is OK to overlook, but then you set standards that are not necessarily in the rulebook by saying a certain word is an "automatic T" while not being consistent and saying other words elicit the same reaction. I think your problem is I do not agree with you on that situation and then there is a problem with what I am saying. I just find your position and others ironic when you clearly use a "personal standard" for giving a T when it works for you, but then want to be critical of others that do the same in other issues. And no matter how much the NF tries to tell people to apply all their rules, this is not going to ever happen unless they start assigning games and evaluating officials. Until then, all of these issues will stay local on some level.

Peace

You're not saying much with which I disagree here. But I'll correct a couple of things.

1. I never said "automatic." Even in situations where I can't imagine not calling a T, I don't use that word because there simply might be something that comes up where a T isn't warranted.

2. I never said my standard was personal, or mine for that matter. It's local, and I'm not sure how many more times I'd need to say it.

3. My problem was I couldn't tell what you were saying. Frankly, I expected you to be the lone voice of dissent on this based on past discussions. You've made it clear that the standards are different in Chicago than in Colorado Springs. I'm ok with that, to be honest.

Do I like the idea of letting kids drop bombs like this without Ts? Not really. But that's my personal standard that I don't get to inject into your games, even if it happens to match the local standard where I work.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

You're not saying much with which I disagree here. But I'll correct a couple of things.

1. I never said "automatic." Even in situations where I can't imagine not calling a T, I don't use that word because there simply might be something that comes up where a T isn't warranted.

If you noticed, this was my biggest disagreement in that thread. I do not think that was an "automatic" and the context in which a player used certain language would matter to me. I also never said that it would just be overlooked. I probably would tell the kid to watch his language and then I would not have to worry about this the rest of the game.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

2. I never said my standard was personal, or mine for that matter. It's local, and I'm not sure how many more times I'd need to say it.

I said almost the same thing, but for some reason that does not seem to work for you. Oh, you know someone from my area (even though we likely do not work for all the same people or in the same conferences), not sure how many times I need to say that either.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

3. My problem was I couldn't tell what you were saying. Frankly, I expected you to be the lone voice of dissent on this based on past discussions. You've made it clear that the standards are different in Chicago than in Colorado Springs. I'm ok with that, to be honest.

Really? You could not tell that I needed a kid to do more than just say something that the bench could hear? You could not tell that it was not an "automatic" T if the kid said that only where the bench was hearing this? Not that the fans in the gym heard the kid or that maybe the kids other behaviors might matter to me. You did not understand that at all? And for the record, I do not live in Chicago. I live in Wheaton, but I work in multiple parts of the state like the Quad Cities, Peoria, Rock Falls, Joliet and Quincy. Before you look on a map, these places are in some cases over 270 miles from each other. And all those places do not have the same assignors or standards with their officials. Oh, I doubt there is another person that could say they worked in those areas this year.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Do I like the idea of letting kids drop bombs like this without Ts? Not really. But that's my personal standard that I don't get to inject into your games, even if it happens to match the local standard where I work.

What is dropping bombs? They either used certain words or they used other words. And I also have no problem with your procedure or your standards. I am only talking about what "I" will do. I even do not care if another official in my area would give a T for this. They are the one that will have to explain it. And if they work for the right person that night, it will be accepted without problem. Move the game to another location that might be questioned. I would rather not be questioned if the only standard is, "the opposing bench heard it."

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If you noticed, this was my biggest disagreement in that thread. I do not think that was an "automatic" and the context in which a player used certain language would matter to me. I also never said that it would just be overlooked. I probably would tell the kid to watch his language and then I would not have to worry about this the rest of the game.

I agree context matters. I also disagreed with your implication that the context of the OP was insufficient. I felt it was sufficient, in that about the only way I'm letting an F-bomb go when it's loud enough for the opposing bench to hear is with an injury of some sort.

Frankly, I expected you to simply say you'd talk to him; the context was already there. That was my only initial point; there was plenty of context to say what you'd do.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Really? You could not tell that I needed a kid to do more than just say something that the bench could hear? You could not tell that it was not an "automatic" T if the kid said that only where the bench was hearing this? Not that the fans in the gym heard the kid or that maybe the kids other behaviors might matter to me. You did not understand that at all? And for the record, I do not live in Chicago. I live in Wheaton, but I work in multiple parts of the state like the Quad Cities, Peoria, Rock Falls, Joliet and Quincy. Before you look on a map, these places are in some cases over 270 miles from each other. And all those places do not have the same assignors or standards with their officials. Oh, I doubt there is another person that could say they worked in those areas this year.

1. see above.
2. I was going for the semi-alliteration. Maybe I could have gone with Wheaton and Wheat Ridge. Or Des Moines and Denver. Or....

Originally Posted by JRutledge

What is dropping bombs? They either used certain words or they used other words.

Good grief, it's a euphamism for saying "Fu@k." I wasn't aware there was any confusion there.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And I also have no problem with your procedure or your standards. I am only talking about what "I" will do. I even do not care if another official in my area would give a T for this. They are the one that will have to explain it. And if they work for the right person that night, it will be accepted without problem. Move the game to another location that might be questioned. I would rather not be questioned if the only standard is, "the opposing bench heard it."

To me, "the opposing bench" hearing it may as well be some folks in the stands. Hell, if I'm standing 20 feet away and I can hear it, it's probably too loud; but that's all judgment anyway.

The only defense I'd need is, "he said XXXX, and it was too loud to ignore or warn."

Personally, I'd be more concerned with the opposing bench hearing it than some random fans sitting in the sweat row; but that might be just me.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I agree context matters. I also disagreed with your implication that the context of the OP was insufficient. I felt it was sufficient, in that about the only way I'm letting an F-bomb go when it's loud enough for the opposing bench to hear is with an injury of some sort.

Why is your distinction so important, but my distinction is not? That is what I do not understand. Where in the rules does it say that it is OK to use profanity if you are injured?

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Frankly, I expected you to simply say you'd talk to him; the context was already there. That was my only initial point; there was plenty of context to say what you'd do.

I would talk to him and stated I would do that. But you seem caught up on the F-Bomb being so over the top that we must give a T. I even asked why the F-Bomb and not other language that I know are not seen as appropriate? Still waiting on that answer from anyone (I am not going to get it it appears).

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

1. see above.
2. I was going for the semi-alliteration. Maybe I could have gone with Wheaton and Wheat Ridge. Or Des Moines and Denver. Or....

You could have. And that would have been better than assuming that someone on here work in the same places.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Good grief, it's a euphamism for saying "Fu@k." I wasn't aware there was any confusion there.

Relax it is sarcasm. People I am around do not call that a "bomb." I was just playing with you for God's sake. Stop taking yourself and this conversation so seriously.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

To me, "the opposing bench" hearing it may as well be some folks in the stands. Hell, if I'm standing 20 feet away and I can hear it, it's probably too loud; but that's all judgment anyway.

The only defense I'd need is, "he said XXXX, and it was too loud to ignore or warn."

That is not what he said. He said only the bench could hear it and the opposing coach complained. That is what we were responding to, not how many feet you are away from the play you were or if someone else could hear it. I know of gyms where the bench is not close to the fans, so it is possible that only a few people could hear something like that. In other places the stands would have heard it. Again, all of those factors matter to me. That might sound like splitting hairs to you, but this is why that word is not an "automatic" to me. Heck a kid can get a T from me without me even knowing what he said, so I do not know why you are stuck on the language part as the only unacceptable part of this action.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Personally, I'd be more concerned with the opposing bench hearing it than some random fans sitting in the sweat row; but that might be just me.

We agree on something. But I really do not care what a coach thinks as I would probably inform him that I likely passed on language from his players too. We are not dealing with angels here.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Why is your distinction so important, but my distinction is not? That is what I do not understand. Where in the rules does it say that it is OK to use profanity if you are injured?

It's a local rule.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I would talk to him and stated I would do that. But you seem caught up on the F-Bomb being so over the top that we must give a T. I even asked why the F-Bomb and not other language that I know are not seen as appropriate? Still waiting on that answer from anyone (I am not going to get it it appears).

Because, as I stated before, in most areas it's considered the big'n. Why is it worse than sh1t or damn? I don't know. It is what it is.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You could have. And that would have been better than assuming that someone on here work in the same places.

I'm not sure what you're saying here, to be honest. I didn't assume anything, I was just wrong. I've never actually met someone from Illinois that wasn't from Chicago, maybe that's why.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Relax it is sarcasm. People I am around do not call that a "bomb." I was just playing with you for God's sake. Stop taking yourself and this conversation so seriously.

I don't want to stop.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

That is not what he said. He said only the bench could hear it and the opposing coach complained. That is what we were responding to, not how many feet you are away from the play you were or if someone else could hear it. I know of gyms where the bench is not close to the fans, so it is possible that only a few people could hear something like that. In other places the stands would have heard it. Again, all of those factors matter to me. That might sound like splitting hairs to you, but this is why that word is not an "automatic" to me. Heck a kid can get a T from me without me even knowing what he said, so I do not know why you are stuck on the language part as the only unacceptable part of this action.

Yeah, I know I added the 20 feet thing to make a point.

The only thing the kid in the OP did wrong was the word, so perhaps that's why?

Originally Posted by JRutledge

We agree on something. But I really do not care what a coach thinks as I would probably inform him that I likely passed on language from his players too. We are not dealing with angels here.

Peace

With this, we agree on more than we disagree. But I'll add that I wouldn't have passed on a similar issue with his player. If it's mumbled under his breath and only I hear it (and maybe a teammate or two), I'll talk to him. If he says it so the opponents can hear it, well, wrong place wrong time kid.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

It's a local rule.

No, just you will be giving a lot of Ts if that is your only way to handle things in certain places.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Because, as I stated before, in most areas it's considered the big'n. Why is it worse than sh1t or damn? I don't know. It is what it is.

I obviously do not concern myself with "most areas." If that was the case I would not worry about darn side panels on jerseys. Oh, that is in the rules too and when discussed people said their state did not care about those rules. So why worry about what others do in "most areas?"

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I'm not sure what you're saying here, to be honest. I didn't assume anything, I was just wrong. I've never actually met someone from Illinois that wasn't from Chicago, maybe that's why.

Just because someone here might live in the same region, does not mean we all work for the same people. Actually I am not aware of anyone here that works most leagues I do, despite our actual address.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I don't want to stop.

I see.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Yeah, I know I added the 20 feet thing to make a point.

I know, but not apart of the original conversation.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

The only thing the kid in the OP did wrong was the word, so perhaps that's why?

Good, but this is why for me nothing is "automatic."

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

With this, we agree on more than we disagree. But I'll add that I wouldn't have passed on a similar issue with his player. If it's mumbled under his breath and only I hear it (and maybe a teammate or two), I'll talk to him. If he says it so the opponents can hear it, well, wrong place wrong time kid.

But it appears the words were said after a missed shot. If that is all that took place, I would rather talk to the player than give a T. I do not have to give a T to prove I am there and will not tolerate certain behavior. Heck we all the time weigh other actions, not sure why this is so different?

Peace

[chymechowder]

Scenario:

Visitors up by 2; they're dribbling the ball in the FC with 1 min. left in the game.

A member of the home crowd shoots a roman candle onto the court. The pyrotechnic strikes and ignites the jersey of a visiting player, who loudly exclaims "Some crazy [maggot farmer] just lit me on fire!" as he takes off his burning jersey and throws it to the floor.

A. No technicals
B. One technical for swearing
C. One technical for removing jersey
D. Two technicals

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by chymechowder

Scenario:

Visitors up by 2; they're dribbling the ball in the FC with 1 min. left in the game.

A member of the home crowd shoots a roman candle onto the court. The pyrotechnic strikes and ignites the jersey of a visiting player, who loudly exclaims "Some crazy [maggot farmer] just lit me on fire!" as he takes off his burning jersey and throws it to the floor.

A. No technicals
B. One technical for swearing
C. One technical for removing jersey
D. Two technicals

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by chymechowder

Scenario:

Visitors up by 2; they're dribbling the ball in the FC with 1 min. left in the game.

A member of the home crowd shoots a roman candle onto the court. The pyrotechnic strikes and ignites the jersey of a visiting player, who loudly exclaims "Some crazy [maggot farmer] just lit me on fire!" as he takes off his burning jersey and throws it to the floor.

A. No technicals
B. One technical for swearing
C. One technical for removing jersey
D. Two technicals

Fine, I'll play along.

If the floor is good enough to finish the game after the smoke clears -- and the crowd is evacuated after the arrest of said maggot farmer -- a technical foul goes to the home team, citing 2-8-1. (If that isn't using discretion, as the note insists, I don't know what is.)

[APG]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Fine, I'll play along.

If the floor is good enough to finish the game after the smoke clears -- and the crowd is evacuated after the arrest of said maggot farmer -- a technical foul goes to the home team, citing 2-8-1. (If that isn't using discretion, as the note insists, I don't know what is.)

A certain ref in Nevada would be very proud.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

A certain ref in Nevada would be very proud.

Be nice!!!!

Peace

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

A certain ref in Nevada would be very proud.

True.

But, good lord! If you can't use 2-8-1 after a fan uses projectile flames, when can you use it!?

[APG]

Originally Posted by bainsey

True.

But, good lord! If you can't use 2-8-1 after a fan uses projectile flames, when can you use it!?

I don't know about you, but I'd be leery of T'ing a crowd that includes those that have projectile fireworks...unlike that player, I paid good money for my shirt!

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by chymechowder

Scenario:

Visitors up by 2; they're dribbling the ball in the FC with 1 min. left in the game.

A member of the home crowd shoots a roman candle onto the court. The pyrotechnic strikes and ignites the jersey of a visiting player, who loudly exclaims "Some crazy [maggot farmer] just lit me on fire!" as he takes off his burning jersey and throws it to the floor.

A. No technicals
B. One technical for swearing
C. One technical for removing jersey
D. Two technicals

E. Fire code violation; game postponed.