T or ignore?....

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

A short, polite, conversation during a TO? I'll do that every game, if needed.

The "assistant coaches are there to pass out towels and drive the bus" stuff applies to questioning / complaining issues and can be (and often is) taken too far.

Oh, on the original post -- address the later behavior, even if you decide not to T.

I'm not explaining calls/no-calls to AC's. I'll tell him where the ball is being put in play, what his player did on a travel, what his player did on an illegal screen call, etc. But I'm not explaining to an AC why I didn't make a call.

[vbzebra]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I'm not explaining calls/no-calls to AC's. I'll tell him where the ball is being put in play, what his player did on a travel, what his player did on an illegal screen call, etc. But I'm not explaining to an AC why I didn't make a call.

good point, thanks! And you're right about what we're working, i'm pretty sure!

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I'm not explaining calls/no-calls to AC's. I'll tell him where the ball is being put in play, what his player did on a travel, what his player did on an illegal screen call, etc. But I'm not explaining to an AC why I didn't make a call.

If the HC is not saying anything, I am certainly not saying anything to the AC. I get that some do not like that approach, but I have enough to do and to answer to with a coach, I am not listening to 5 people and getting 5 different conversations. I am having one conversation and if the HC has something to say, then he should do that and not the AC. Also timeouts are different in anyway. A conversation during a timeout better be non-confrontational and better be so they can get information. The minute that turns to what I must do or explain then the conversation is over, whether that is AC or the HC. And the reality is the experienced coaches know this anyway and this is not a problem. It is usually the ignorant coaches that either do not have the experience that this is a problem.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I'm not explaining calls/no-calls to AC's. I'll tell him where the ball is being put in play, what his player did on a travel, what his player did on an illegal screen call, etc. But I'm not explaining to an AC why I didn't make a call.

If you explain one type of decision, why not the other?

If asked appropriately, respectfully and at the right time, I have no problem answering a question from an assistant.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If you explain one type of decision, why not the other?

If asked appropriately, respectfully and at the right time, I have no problem answering a question from an assistant.

I'll give information, but I am not explaining anything to an AC. There is a difference between 'answering a question' and 'explaining a call/no-call'. And I made that clear in my original post.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I'll give information, but I am not explaining anything to an AC. There is a difference between 'answering a question' and 'explaining a call/no-call'. And I made that clear in my original post.

Big difference.

Peace

[vbzebra]

all great information everyone, thanks!

back at it for two games there this afternoon. Lesson learned