T or ignore?....
 

summer game...team B assistant asks for an explanation of a non call during a timeout. i give it, he disagrees (nothing crazy, just disagrees, ok coach).

Team B down big late....14 seconds to go, same B assistant decides to start yelling from bench "you guys missed a really good game, a really good game"...

I did not T, just ignored, clock ran out. I figured "what good would it do to the game now to T him"? clock runs out, game over....

Should i have T'd assistant this late just b/c he's now deciding to complain when down big at this point in game with A holding ball as clock runs out?

Table and benches were set up weird due to many courts in gym...both benches were more in A's frontcourt in 2nd half, which is why i could hear him as trail tableside....

I'm not letting a coach a coach "show me up," especially an assistant, just because he thinks he can get away with it or because the game is winding down.

If he's just yappin to hear himself yap, I may have passed on it.

But, if he's loud enough, demonstrative enough, looking to show me up, or asking for it, I might whack him!

I really don't care what kind of league it is or what time of yr. I have a threshold and if you cross it you'll know.

Another HTBT moment for me I suppose.

wasn't demostrative, just sitting down yelling it. if he stood up, then yes, no question...oh well, live and learn for me i guess :D

Old and stale, but it still gives me a chuckle ...
 

You're right coach, unfortunately I had to work this one ...

Niiice!

Since when did we start giving assistants explanations?
I think that in & of itself opened the door to the later situation.

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 hear ya Bob... In my experiences, when you talk to 1 of them the other 2 to 3 now want explanations. Then the trainer feels the need to talk, pretty soon mom & dad are on the floor asking questions. I'll stick to the script as far as verbal communication goes!

A simple statement to the HC in passing (or at a TO as Bob may be inferring) works too, "Coach, you need to control your bench."

Usually, they'll get the meaning.....

True, I generally go that route when the AC is out of line. For a simple question, I'll ask, "HEAD COACH, do YOU have a question for me?"

The smart ones generally get the meaning ;)

I've don't have a problem answering a question during a timeout, even from an AC. If someone takes that as some sort of license, that's easy enough to deal with.

As for the OP, easy T. That comment in that situation is a borderline T for the HC; Everytime for an AC.

Just remember that the abbreviation for Assistant Coach is "A$$. Coach".

T him. I'm pretty sure I know what you are working this weekend and you (or your fellow association officials) will probably be seeing this same guy during the season. If he gets away with it now he and his HC are gonna be all bewildered when they get T'd up during the season.

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.

Definitely HTBT, but I can't see how a T here makes the game better. With only 14 seconds, if (and that's a big "if" with so little time left) I can say to the head coach, "Hey Coach, you don't really want him to take a T now, do you?" I might. But a T here might actually make things worse by waking up the Head Coach.

As described, I agree with not giving a T.

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

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

Just because a T won't make the game better doesn't mean it shouldn't be called, IMO. With 14 seconds left, the only thing that's going to actually make the game better is to let 14 seconds run off the clock; but I think this T needs to be called. Even if it only makes the next game better.

If the behavior is borderline, I can see using the "will it make the game better" criteria. But an AC making the announcement in the OP? That's not borderline for an AC. For an HC? Maybe borderline, but not an AC.

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.

Classic!!!! Well-played.

Big difference.

Peace

all great information everyone, thanks!

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

Bingo. Let it run. If you T the assistant at that point of that game (game is over, coach is taking it like a man and just wants to be done), there's a good chance you'll end up T'ing the head coach, too. Just doesn't seem worth it to me.

Had the AC been put in his place when the questioning started during the timeout, perhaps he would've known that he wasn't dealing with summer refs & the EOG sitch may not have occurred. Once they think you're inexperienced they really try you! Had he been dealt with earlier a T with 1 second left is justified. Please tell me that in the OP he didn't walk onto the floor seeking an answer.

Sitting behind a bench last season, I hear an AC telling the staff, "leave those two alone, but we got that one." Speaking about one of the officials who answered every question from anybody on the bench. Boy did they work him all nite!!
That particular official is of the mindset... I'll answer questions from those who ask in a respectful manner.
Coaching staffs know the communication guidelines & when we stray, it can make for a long nite.

My point is, no T is going to make the game better with 14 seconds left. Do you swallow the whistle on all of them for that reason? Of course not. If it's a borderline call, I can see using that as a factor, but if A1 screams, "Aren't you going to call a foul?" with 14 seconds left, aren't you going to call that? If an HC says it, no big deal. If an AC yells it for the gym to hear; I just don't think I can ignore that.

Must make a difference in how you answer, cause I've never had that problem. Aside from that, I don't answer enough questions that they'll get that impression. One, maybe two. I've never had to go beyond that, but there would quickly come a time when I'd approach the HC and inform him that he will need to be the one communicating with us.

I just don't see it as a big deal during timeouts. Liveball? No way I'm acknowledging an AC. Too many headaches. With a max of 12 TOs (including quarter breaks), I've never had to answer more than 1 or 2 AC questions during a given game.

Let me amend my earlier answer -- if he asks "what happened there so I can teachmy players?" that's one thing. If he says "wtf was that? you've got to have something there" then it's another.

Each fits the OP "asks for an explanation."

sorry...to specificially quote.....2nd half, t/o red...i'm tableside calling and reporting T.O. in front of red bench. I report, then hear from AC (actually politely), "can you explain to me why that wasn't a backcourt violation?".

i explained, he disagreed, 'ok coach' (by me) and I walked away. didn't hear anymore til around :14 to go and counting.....

I'm not answering jeapordy questions. All he's doing is giving you advice in the form of a question, that doesn't qualify, IMO.

+1

Sometimes, we send an unitended message when we choose to ignore. The message inferred could be that one can get away with statements like the AC made.

I agree with Snaqs. If you T him up today, there will be less liklihood of someone else having to deal with it in the future.

I see no problem with this question. Seems reasonable, polite and at an appropriate time. I'll answer that.

If the HC didn't need an explanation I see no need in giving the AC one.

Disagree. Example: Head coach already has been assessed a technical foul, but in the closing seconds is becoming heated and his players are feeding off it (becoming more physical/rough). If you dump him, the game is much more likely to end without further incident.

If, however, you have a head coach who is calmly taking his beating and wants nothing more than to see the clock hit zeros; and then you T an assistant because of a non-vulgar comment, what do you think the chances are that your game will end without further incident? Slim and none. Your T there is likely to make the game worse, in fact, rather than better.

Possible, but probably not. It's not vulgar, it's not abusive, it's just loud. If he's been a problem all night, and this is the final straw, then I can see it. But if it's just frustration, HTBT, but probably not.

Each person has to find his/her level for what's acceptable in which circumstances. This is one where I think it's better to ignore. If the comment is "Are you &%#$* kidding me? Where's the @&#$% foul????" then you leave me no choice, regardless of time/score. But for non-vulgar, non-abusive frustration, I'm very likely to ignore it.

I have to disagree here if you are only waiting for the curse word. Also abusive does not mean that you had to use certain words. You can be abusive if you are loud and obnoxious. We are mostly talking about school aged kids, not the pros or even college. So if I have a kid yelling at me and saying "Are you going to call a foul?" we will have some problems. For one his behavior might prompt other out of bounds behavior and I also realize that I will have a coach or player again at some point. I am not saying that a T with 14 seconds is the best time, but if that puts a seed in the mind the next time this behavior will not be tolerated when at least I am working their game, that is a win.

I once T'd a coach with about :56 in a game and I knew I had him later in the season. He yelled when the game was quite and tried to make a situation personal. The T made the game better at the time because he did not do that again and most of all the next game I had him, he did not say a single word. Mission accomplished as far as I am concerned. And he made a comment to my partner but not to me in that second game and I did not have to address the same mess I did in the first game.

Peace

And this my friends is the bottom line...

Got GM Skills?

You're right. I worded that badly. I'm not only waiting for the curse word. My point was only that using the curse words that way leaves me no choice. There will other times that are abusive, without being vulgar, as you point out. But when it is vulgar and abusive, as in my example, I think (hope) we can agree that a T there is necessary regardless of time/score.

Agreed. But I think you can also be loud and obnoxious without being abusive. You call a foul and the kid LOUDLY says, "Oh, come on!" Loud, yes. T? Not for me.

Agreed again. (When do we start hugging?) But for me, anyway, I may not use a technical foul to address those problems. In fact, I will almost definitely NOT use a technical foul for a first offense.

We're 4-for-4, because I agree yet again.

Then it's a great technical foul.

Great points Scrapper1 & JRut!

I had a T like this in a camp setting this summer. Initially I passed & was gonna set him straight after I took care of business. But he chose to walk behind me from the paint to the top of the key being extremely demonstrative... so I whacked him.

I hate it when the player not involved in the play is not only talking the most but also wrong as two left shoes.

Instead of using timelines for determining good technicals, I like the 3 questions we ask ourselves:

1. Does it fit the game?
2. Can my immediate supervisor defend?
3. Does it make the game better?

3 for 3 is a T!

Unless they've been a problem or pushing the limits, why create an enemy. If he's truly looking for an explanation, give it to them.

Camron you know doggone well that most of the time these are not real questions but accusations wrapped up in a question. If you thought it was something else I am sure you would have called it. Like the common one I am seeing, "Didn't they hit the arm first.......(fill in the blank)?" If I am going to have a debate of any kind, it is not going to be with an AC.

Peace

Rules & regulations are in place to keep order. How is adhering to policies & procedures creating an enemy?

We give him an explanation, now he's calling timeouts & standing up more than usual, walking subs to the table, etc.

For me, if you give them an inch, 8 out of 10 times they'll take a mile. Not saying be rude or degrading to them, but rules & regs are put in place for a reason.

I tend to answer questions from HC on fouls more than violations anyway. I do not have the time to explain why this wasn't a travel. Instead I'd rather go with coach, what foot did you have the pivot being? Of course they cannot answer so its the end of the conversation...

I do not have time to explain why this wasn't a backcourt violation. Instead I'd rather go with, did you think the dribbler had all 3 points across prior to passing the ball? When they look dumbfounded, you'll see it on film coach.

I find it tough to teach rules classes during the course of the game! But I always offer to shoot them any rule via email.

We can discuss fouls & no calls all day, as that is a judgement call & they have a right to know what I saw or (God forbid) thought I saw.
Most times, you explain & they have something else to say. I can live with that from the coach, its his job. But no back & forth whatsoever with ACs or players.

I don't find it all that difficult to draw the line at an inch, if that's where I want it drawn. If the AC wants to take my courtesy as some sort of license, that's his problem, not mine.

True, but why even allow for the opportunity to occur?
Proactive!

When it is all said and done, this is really about whatever you are comfortable with. What makes me successful as an official is what makes me successful. What makes someone else successful make them successful? I do not give a damn what coaches think of me. I never really have. I have a job to do and that job comes first. If they are offended by the way I deal with them, they will probably not be around long enough for me to care or I passed 20 other schools to get to their school or conference. I have no problem answering questions, but not on every play and not yelling across the court. And I know other officials that feel they need to make everyone happy, while making no one happy. You have to do what works for you and do not care what others do in the end. There are many ways to the mountain top and we should all remember that in this discussion. That means for me AC should be seen and not heard. That is also my all sports position when I officiate/umpire and it works for me. I have found when a coach asks a question, 9 times out of 10 it is not to really get knowledge; it is to accuse you of not seeing something or agreeing with them. I would rather do that with a HC who earned the right to be the HC than someone that is helping out or no one thinks they are competent to run the program. And when the HC is not saying something I am certainly not going to get into much discussion with the AC about much of anything. Some AC are more known than others and they I will treat them as they treat me. If they are respectful or really asking a question and I have time I will answer. But that is not very often. I just think many worry too much about what coaches thing. We stop doing that then we will have less to worry about.

Peace

One of my mentors once gave me this advice. Anytime one coach wants to ask you a question during a TO ask him to wait one second as you want to invite the opposing coach over too, they might want to hear this. More often then not the convo ends right there. It also lets both sides know that neither is going to be working you for calls.

So you never answer questions from a coach?

I tend to think proaction should be used to prevent actual problems. I've never had an AC go too far in this. The only times I've had to ring HP an AC, he never took the time to ask any questions.

Hahaha ok I'll buy that Snaqs!

When I get an opportunity to put my own crew together on a city-league game, I'm gonna ask you first! You'll see first hand how an AC can become an "actual problem" when you converse with them :D

:D. I'll take you up on it.

It was a timeout, what else would you need to do for the next 60 seconds?

Then you walk away...but just because it might turn into that doesn't mean it will...particularly if the assistant hasn't said a word all game. Give them a short answer and move on.

Talk to my partners, look at hot chicks, get the sweat out of my eyes, etc, etc.
Basically, many other things besides having discussions with an AC.

One for sure way it wont turn into that... only give explainations to the HC! And as I previously stated, for the most part, HCs rarely get in-game rules clinics. They should know the basic rules (backcourt, travel, illegal dribble) at the levels I work. Judgement call questions will always get time of day, when time permits & through the proper channels. And that has worked for me on my journey.

Been There, Done That ...
 

The following didn't involve an assistant, but sometimes you just have to charge a technical foul, for no other reason than the fact that the coach deserves it:

http://forum.officiating.com/basketb...tml#post686961

What a lively discussion!!!! I wonder on how NoFear would have faired. :D