Vocal Coach

[mplagrow]

I reffed an 8th grade game with a coach known to be extremely vocal about calls and noncalls that don't exist. This time, his star player had three fouls in the first quarter, fair calls. My partner, an experienced guy, mentioned at the half that it was a shame this decent player had three fouls already, and we should make sure that if we call a foul on him, that it was a 'real' foul. He then privately told this coach that we wouldn't ticky-tack him out of the game. The coach showed tremendous respect to us at the end of the game (lost by 1). Does the end justify the means in this case? The player finished with 3 fouls, but I felt like I had to be cautious about calling against him. I don't think my partner was trying to tell ME something, because I only called one of the fouls, and it was obvious.

[firedoc]

OUTRAGEOUS! The thought of protecting a player because he is a good player smacks of the NBA. If there is a foul, then call it. If it is a foul on player A1, then it should also be a foul against A2 or A3. When I work a game, I never see player's faces...only the color of the jersey and I think that this is the best way to go.

Behavior exhibited by this particular official puts the opposing team at a disadvantage and makes us all look bad.

[canuckrefguy]

IMHO, it is a part of good game management to be aware of players in foul trouble, because you DO want the disqualifying foul to be a good, solid call.

But talking to the coach about it, and the fact this player went the rest of the game without another foul is brutal.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by canuckrefguy
IMHO, it is a part of good game management to be aware of players in foul trouble, because you DO want the disqualifying foul to be a good, solid call.

I have to agree. Knowing what the "star" has in fouls is very good management. If you foul out the "star" for ticky-tack fouls, you might have more trouble than you can ever realize. You should call fouls on good players regardless, just make sure you are not anticipating action or calling things that are not obvious. If they foul, they foul. Just make sure the last two especially are good ones.

Peace

[zebraman]

I agree with Rut. Knowing who is in foul trouble, if you can remember, is good game management. It doesn't mean you don't call any more fouls on that player, it means that you remind yourself even more to "hold your whistle" to ensure that you don't call something on that player that you wish you could take back (inadvertant contact).

Now as far as your partner telling the coach...that was dumb. Talk about setting yourself if you do have to call another foul. :-)

Z

[Ref Daddy]

These are tough. I had an 8th grade game a few weeks ago.... one player was 6'8" and dominated. A real man among boys scenario.

Talk about challenging to keep game and call consistency - when the players skills were so diverse!

Just concentrate. We agreed to "call what we saw and forget the scorebook".

Biggest issue was other coach "needed our help" (my words) to try to get the stud out of the game. Everything the player did warranted a complaint. After he got his 35th point the coach gave up.

Tough situation.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by Ref Daddy

These are tough. I had an 8th grade game a few weeks ago.... one player was 6'8" and dominated. A real man among boys scenario.

6'8"????? To heck with LeBron James - someone needs to double check that this kid is eligible to play for an 8th grade team!!!

[refjef40]

Wow!I never ever believe in making statements to a coach that sound like a promise to call or do anything except work hard and do my best.That partner who had experience had bad experience thats for sure.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by zebraman
I It doesn't mean you don't call any more fouls on that player, it means that you remind yourself even more to "hold your whistle" to ensure that you don't call something on that player that you wish you could take back (inadvertant contact).

Don't you do this on every call on every player during every game? You should NEVER take an individuals foul count into consideration when making your calls. To do so is a disservice to the other players and the game.

Officials who subscribe to this philosophy, and those who are in a position to eval the "moving up" of other officials who do use this technique ought to be drummed out of the officials ranks.

Favoritism is favoritism no matter how you try to rationalize it.

[Marty Rogers]

I'm with Mark. This is unethical and umbecoming of an official.

[BigJoe]

I'm on the side of the faceless player officials. I used to have a partner who knew exactly who the best players were and how many fouls they had. I didn't agree then and don't agree now. If you think it is a foul how can you decide in a split second whether it is a good foul or not. Most fouls kids commit aren't good fouls. But how can you not call a foul just because the best player might foul out? Is this fair to the other team that you might have called it if he only had two fouls? I had a game last night where the visiting team's best player got three well deserved fouls in the first quarter. He sat most of the rest of the first half. First possession of the third quarter the home team was playing man to man defense and a V player was running along the endline. The H defender was in pursuit. V2 (the best player with three fouls) steps into H1 actually hip-checking (a term from my hockey playing days!) him out of bounds. The contact was on his leg and hip, impossible to be construed as a legal screen. The coach said it was a horrible call. In my mind if I would have let that go, we would have been in for a very long night. It was already a 30 point game at that point.

[williebfree]

As I read your post I was aghast. If I had an “experienced” partner making statements like that I would let him know I am calling them as I see them. I certainly would dissuade ANY contact with the coach that included acknowledgement of a player being in “foul trouble” and an indication, or “promise” to avoid ticky-tack calls.

If I am Coach B and I overhear this conversation, I am going to question your integrity on every call from that point, and rightfully so.

[RecRef]

Add a big me too with those who find this outrageous.

Another reason I find it reprehensible is that such actions takes away a coaching possibility of the other team. When I coached and I knew that the star player of the other team was in foul trouble I would send my point guard past him so we could get a hold or a block call against him.

The likelihood of an 8th grade game being taped is small, but not unknown. At any level you better hope that it is not if you are going to hold your calls. I would hope the AD would be on the phone the next morning to your assignor.

[zebraman]

Originally posted by Mark Padgett

Don't you do this on every call on every player during every game? You should NEVER take an individuals foul count into consideration when making your calls. To do so is a disservice to the other players and the game.

Favoritism is favoritism no matter how you try to rationalize it.

Please re-read my post. You are twisting it. I use a "4 fouls on a player" scenario to once again remind myself to hold my whistle. Yes, I try to hold my whistle all game, but when I know there are player(s) in foul trouble, it's a good time for a reminder. Haven't you ever called a foul and then thought, "you know, letting that go would probably have been better in this game?" I have. I don't know any officials who haven't. Nothing wrong with using a game situation to again remind myself and focus my concentration even more. That's just good preventative officiating in my book. It doesn't change what I consider a foul. We all make mistakes, but making a mistake on the 5th foul is magnified even more because I just disqualified a player.

If a time-out is called with 5 seconds left in a game, don't you go over to your partner and go over a few things to make sure you get things right at the end? Aren't you supposed to be doing all those things you talk about anyway? Yes, but reminders help us focus. Focus good. Loss of focus bad. :-)

Z

Z

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by zebraman
Focus good. Loss of focus bad. :-)

Thank you. We'll take a quick break; but then we're coming right back with more of the Tarzan, Tonto, and Frankenstein Show!!!

Chuck