Final TO

[zebraman]

Rut's wisdom: "I will remember your "follow the rules" montra, when you T a coach that has one foot out of the coaching box and he is talking to his team. I expect you give a T to that coach, because the rules says so. But then again, you have no common sense, so what else is new?"

Apparently the difference in reasoning between you and I is that I am able to distinguish a difference between the two things and I also have the reasoning power to understand the difference between following the rule about notifying coaches when they are out of time-outs and not calling every "by the book" 3-in-the-key. You see, calling 3-seconds when there is no advantage does not make the game better. It serves no purpose. Neither does calling a T when a coach is barely out of his/her box. Notifying a coach that they are out of time-outs serves a purpose and it also is a courtesy and helps establish a positive relationship between coach and official.

What started this thread was that Hank Nichols, Bob D'Amato, Marty Shapiro, Don Shea, Tom Lopes and Jeff Nichols all said to notify the coach. Of course, their resumes are surely not as extensive as yours nor as extensive as the head clinician for your state of Illinois. :-)

Z

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by zebraman

Apparently the difference in reasoning between you and I is that I am able to distinguish a difference between the two things and I also have the reasoning power to understand the difference between following the rule about notifying coaches when they are out of time-outs and not calling every "by the book" 3-in-the-key. You see, calling 3-seconds when there is no advantage does not make the game better. It serves no purpose. Neither does calling a T when a coach is barely out of his/her box. Notifying a coach that they are out of time-outs serves a purpose and it also is a courtesy and helps establish a positive relationship between coach and official.

You cannot have it both ways. You cannot say on one hand, "you have to follow the rules," then make distictions that the rulebook does not make about calling 3 seconds or "coaching box violations." The rules do not speak about advantage/disadavantage for either, but you want to claim it is "Rut's Rules" when I make a distiction with this rule, just like anyone does with others. And remember Z, I am not the one handing out Ts left and right. I average less than one a year for my career. One of the reasons I do not have to give them, I am not in their face every two seconds to tell them something they are responsible for. Just like they are responsible for how many fouls their players have. But then again, you are in a basketball mecca state. So these are the major issues for the "all world" players and coaches that you have in your programs there I guess.

Originally posted by zebraman

What started this thread was that Hank Nichols, Bob D'Amato, Marty Shapiro, Don Shea, Tom Lopes and Jeff Nichols all said to notify the coach. Of course, their resumes are surely not as extensive as yours nor as extensive as the head clinician for your state of Illinois.

BTW, the individual I am talking about, worked 15 years in the Men's D1 and worked in the Big Ten. He is currently a College Assignor in the area and assigns a big HS Conference. And other current D1 Officials in attendence at his camp ,shared the same attitide. Oh, BTW again, one of the officials that runs this camp is a Big Time D1 Official who has done a National Championship Game and I beleive was in the Final Four this year (or very close). But do not forget, there was an offical in the original post that thought doing what you suggested was "schmoozing" the coaches. So I can see and understand that everyone does not agree on this issue. I also see how you did not mention his name because it did not jog with your opinions on this issue. But why not call his opinion, "Edgar Cartotto's Rules?" Or is that just not catchy for ya? And Cartotto has a belief I do not even share, I do not think you are schmoozing anyone by telling a coach anything, but that is the way he feels. I am not going to tell him to stop officiating because I disagree on this minor point. But then again, I will attend an NCAA Rules Meeting this October and I am sure I will meet some D1 Officials to ask. I do not know if you have ever been to one (probably not I see) but you see officials you watch on TV all the time that are in attendence. And BTW, Hank Nichols and Marcy Weston will be there. This might be the time to address this. Oh well, I digress.

Peace

[zebraman]

Originally posted by JRutledge
You cannot have it both ways. You cannot say on one hand, "you have to follow the rules," then make distictions that the rulebook does not make about calling 3 seconds or "coaching box violations."

Certainly I can. It's called common sense, officiating experience and adjusting to the game. Like I said, I am able to differentiate and reason. Some can, some can't. Even if there was no rule requiring me to inform a team when they used their final time-out, I still would do it. Not only as a courtesy (remember, as officials we're serving the players and coaches) but also because it's good preventative officiating. It just seems to make good common sense to do everything I can to avoid an ugly ending to a game when an excess T is called. I've seen it happen and it ain't pretty. Who doesn't remember Chris Webber for calling a T or not. I don't know if the officals notified the coaches or not (I bet they did or Michigan would have blamed them for it), but how could you not want to do everthing possible to avoid that ugly ending? It's similar to counting the players after a time-out to make sure there aren't 6 on the floor. It's the coaches responsibility too, but we also do our part right?

Z

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by zebraman


Certainly I can. It's called common sense, officiating experience and adjusting to the game. Like I said, I am able to differentiate and reason. Some can, some can't.

So much common sense, you take special issue with something you are not keeping track of like a Football Official or Baseball Umpire do.

Originally posted by zebraman
Even if there was no rule requiring me to inform a team when they used their final time-out, I still would do it.

Which is the essence of your belief system. You would do it no matter what, do not say the rules are that reason. But you are grown, you can say whatever you like.

Originally posted by zebraman

Not only as a courtesy (remember, as officials we're serving the players and coaches) but also because it's good preventative officiating. It just seems to make good common sense to do everything I can to avoid an ugly ending to a game when an excess T is called.

It is preventive officiating to not get involved in something I have nothing to do with. And better yet, what if that coach has been a a$$ the entire game, I do not want to have to T a coach for something at the end of the game, then put more focus on me rather than the coach. That is what happens when you stand next to their huddle or table, when you need to stay away. If a coach wants to yell across the court on you, then at least many people heard him/her say whatever they said to you. If you are standing next to them and they curse you out, chances are, it might be your word against their's. I will take my chances not being in their face.

Joe Crawford gave several Ts in a Dallas Maverick playoff game this year, not only were many of them justified, but the focus turned to Crawford instead of the coaches and players that got the Ts. And when an official gives a T at the end of the game, which might decide the game, you better have a good reason. Telling them about their timeout situation, for me and many other officials is not one of them. Sorry Z, get out of your area and out of your confront zone, you will find people do not always agree with you on this and many other things. Same goes for me.

Originally posted by zebraman

I've seen it happen and it ain't pretty. Who doesn't remember Chris Webber for calling a T or not. I don't know if the officals notified the coaches or not (I bet they did or Michigan would have blamed them for it), but how could you not want to do everthing possible to avoid that ugly ending? It's similar to counting the players after a time-out to make sure there aren't 6 on the floor. It's the coaches responsibility too, but we also do our part right?

I am a huge Michigan fan, Chris Webber called the timeout because his bench and coaches were signaling to him to do so. There was a (it was in SI I believe) picture of the entire bench telling him to call timeout. He did, the officials telling the coaches or not was not ever an issue. As a matter of fact, Billy Packard and Jim Nance (I think he was with him) made a point of this was a coaching issue. Never once did they say it was an official's responsiblity. You might say to yourself these guys have no clue, but this is what the public believes and thinks of this situation. So even if the officials told them or not, the public and the uneducated fan cannot understand why a coach would not be able to know when his team calls a timeout.

Originally posted by zebraman

It's similar to counting the players after a time-out to make sure there aren't 6 on the floor. It's the coaches responsibility too, but we also do our part right?

You are so right, it is similar. But when there are 6 on the court or if that 6th player just comes onto the court, we still give a T, and the coach is the one that gets the blame. Of course we might take a minute to count, but I have had that 6th player just run onto the court because they thought they were playing. There is only so much we can do. Are we suppose to hold their hands and tell them how to shoot and dribble as well?

Peace

[Hawks Coach]

Originally posted by w_sohl

Your scorer should be having this discussion with the table, not the officials. You have a scorer for a reason, to keep track of the game, if they aren't doing that kick them off the team and take their letter away, they don't deserve it.

Let's make this a little clearer. I call TO, my 4th. Table and my scorer agree. My opponent calls TO, it's marked as OUR last TO in the official book, my scorer marks it correctly. My scorer doesn't compare notes because we didn't call TO and the books balanced the last time we did call TO.

If you are communicating with the table regarding the TO situation and they tell you at this moment that this is my last TO, we are liable to be able to fix the official book because it is fresh in your mind who called TO and the table is clearly wrong. I call TO 3 minutes later and we are hosed because we won't be able to reconstruct that the table was wrong 3 minutes ago. This simply because you didn't think it was your job to tell me I am out of TOs.

JRUT -
You are completely inconsistent in your so-called logic. Your response is that I need to keep a book, but that isn't really relevant. My book doesn't count, and it is your job to tell me when the official book says I am out of TOs. My having a scorer is irrelevant if my scorer's version of events will have no impact on your decisions.

You say you will go by the official book and I agree. You need to tell me what the official book says, because my book can have it right but we will be held to a book that may be wrong. I need to know that the official book says we are out of timeouts, and you're supposed to tell me.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
JRUT -
You are completely inconsistent in your so-called logic. Your response is that I need to keep a book, but that isn't really relevant. My book doesn't count, and it is your job to tell me when the official book says I am out of TOs. My having a scorer is irrelevant if my scorer's version of events will have no impact on your decisions.

Well you want to know something, your book does count. It counts a lot. Because if there is a dispute, chances are your scorer is going to tell the officials of any situation that is not correct. And as an official, we only go with the "official book" if we do not have any definitive knowledge to solve the problem ourselves. But many times, we might change what is in the official book, if the vistiting team's book. For example, an issue with a 3 or a 2 point shot. Or who we called a foul on with 4:12 in the 4th quarter. I also assume that if you have a home game, the scorer was assigned by your AD or Game Management. So if your book is the "official" one, you better have them trained accordingly. All I do is tell them what I expect and ask them if they have any questions (if I am the Referee), but in the real world, they might not do anything I want (like marking in the book before we have reported a foul). There is the real world and there is the rulebook. In the real world, everyone does not behave the way it is stated. I am only going to worry about what is important to me to manage "my" game. And this never seems to be a top 10 issue with the official I work with or myself. [/B][/QUOTE]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach

You say you will go by the official book and I agree. You need to tell me what the official book says, because my book can have it right but we will be held to a book that may be wrong. I need to know that the official book says we are out of timeouts, and you're supposed to tell me.

I do not need to tell you anything. In all cases, you spend more time next to that table than I do. You do not move around the court as I do. If you have a question about the book, ask them. It is allowed in the rules, as a head coach you can confer with the table about mistakes with timing or scoring (10-5-1c). Also in the real world, the head coach is the only one that can do this, but if the Assistant coach does this as well, I am not going to worry about it, as long as they are not yelling at me. You have the ability to ask for a timeout if something is incorrect and the Referee has to sort it out. If I am going to tell you at all, it is the responsiblity of the scorer to say something to me (or my partners), not for me to find out or seek this information. And if you have been good and not complaining all game, I will gladly give you information that is passed along to me thru the scorer. But I am not going to find out, or make sure what I think is correct. Just like every other scoring issue, unless I know something is wrong, I am not going to bother them all night to find out. Sorry, I think they have a job to do, and me coming behind them all night is not one of my duties.

Peace

[Edited by JRutledge on Jul 3rd, 2003 at 12:41 PM]

[zebraman]

Rut,
You are now using announcers as sources for your position. LOL ROF! Who will you cite next, Art Bell?

Z

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by zebraman
Rut,
You are now using announcers as sources for your position. LOL ROF! Who will you cite next, Art Bell?

Z

Whether you want to live in an "officiating fantasy world" or not, but officiating is not just about us. If a coach wants you to call, "over the back" you cannot approach them in most cases with rulebook language and logic. You have to find other ways that they understand there is no such thing. But then again Z, this is why when I go to camp and officiate my games, you are no where to be found.

Stay in the Pacific Northwest, where the Trail Blazers and Supersonics are your only basketball role-models.

Peace

[Edited by JRutledge on Jul 3rd, 2003 at 01:26 PM]

[zebraman]

Originally posted by JRutledge
Whether you want to live in an "officiating fantasy world" or not, but officiating is not just about us. [/B]

Bingo. That is why we work with them in a cooperative fashion. Informing them when they are out of timeouts is just another tool to do this. Easy to do and it goes such a long way to effective game management.

Another indication that you are failing to manage the game is your earlier comment that "what if that coach has been a a$$ the entire game, I do not want to have to T a coach for something at the end of the game." If he's been an A$$ the entire game, you have not done your job which is maintaining control of the game and not allowing a coach to be an a$$ the entire game. If you are scared to go near the bench because you might give out a T, you are completely inept at controlling the game.

How long did it take you to think up that Trailblazer and Sonic comment that you edited in? That was a real knee slapper. Man, just call you Chris Rock.

Z

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by zebraman


Bingo. That is why we work with them in a cooperative fashion. Informing them when they are out of timeouts is just another tool to do this. Easy to do and it goes such a long way to effective game management.

What game management issues have I had to deal with? I am sure you will make it up as we go along.

Originally posted by zebraman

Another indication that you are failing to manage the game is your earlier comment that "what if that coach has been a a$$ the entire game, I do not want to have to T a coach for something at the end of the game." If he's been an A$$ the entire game, you have not done your job which is maintaining control of the game and not allowing a coach to be an a$$ the entire game. If you are scared to go near the bench because you might give out a T, you are completely inept at controlling the game.

No Z, if he has been an a$$ the entire game, that says more about him than me. I am not a babysitter and coaches are not children. But then again, you and others are the ones talking about all the problems you have with coaches and the Ts you had to give out. Even if a coach does not like something we do in our game, I draw a line in the sand. If they want to go they cross it they can go. But I have not had to do that in over 6 or 7 years. So I must be doing something right. Especially when I keep getting hired. But you know, so why don't you keep telling me.

Originally posted by zebraman

How long did it take you to think up that Trailblazer and Sonic comment that you edited in? That was a real knee slapper. Man, just call you Chris Rock.

Well when they hold a big time camp in your part of the country, I will get my plane ticket and come. But I might be waiting for a very long time.

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by mick
[/B]

I think it's more important that the coach knows he is out of time-outs, than whether the scorer, or the crew, was the first to check on the number of time-outs that are available.
[/B][/QUOTE]Somehow,I missed this post before.Musta been having to much fun with the other one.

Agree completely,mick.I'll check late in a game to see how many TO's each team has left,too.I don't bother telling a team anything,though,until I know for sure that they are using their last TO-usually when the scorer informs me of that.Then I will always let a team know then.I won't go into a huddle and interrupt a head coach,nor will I interrupt him while he's talking to someone.I will tell an assistant coach ,if one is available,to let the head coach know that he is out of TO's.Once I let someone on the team know about the TO situation,I'm gone immediately.Not gonna hang around to make conversation.

Don't mind calling yappy T's. Don't like calling crappy T's.

[mick]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
...I won't go into a huddle and interrupt a head coach,nor will I interrupt him while he's talking to someone.I will tell an assistant coach ,if one is available,to let the head coach know that he is out of TO's....

YU.P., assistant coaches are specifically useful in that, and maybe only in that, situation.

---

If yer goin' through hell, ... keep on goin'.

[fletch_irwin_m]

Maybe we can bring some sanity back to this little spat.
Scorers make mistakes, but so do we as officials. Should we stop making calls because we make mistakes?
To me this seems logical. Late in a game, I am going to the book to ask what the foul situation is etc. during a time out. If I find out that Team A is out of TO's then I go tell Team A they are out of TO's (Ast or HC) IF IF IF, Team A thinks they have 1 left this is a GREAT time to sort everything out. This way you don't have the messy situation of Team A asking for a TO they think they have, but the table says they don't. Conversely, (Or adidasly, or Nikely) I am not predisposed to tell a coach they have 1, 2 or 3 TO's left. Why? It doesn't matter. They have the ability to ask for and be granted a TO. Also, what I don't want is to have to break down the :30 and full count. When they have none left, then the game can be affected.
Hopefully, I am just repeating information that the assistant coaches have already given them. To me this is good game management