Aggressively approaching official

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

This is a follow up to the closed thread....Jacket toss.

The coach made two separate actions in the heat of the moment. On the initial no-call, she came at the official. She got T'd. The jacket toss is considered to be a respect for the game issue and a separate action regardless of who catches the jacket. Ask Bobby Knight, that old lady in the corner caught that chair

From the NBA VideoRulebook there are multiple examples of what is unacceptable. While these are player related, the message from the NBA (WNBA) is clear.

I guess it is a matter of whether you consider it two separate actions or one. I could go either way depending on the timeframe involved. I don't remember what the specific timing was in the video and I don't care to go watch it again but if it was the first response....then a T...then a moment before the jacket toss, that could easily be another. But if it was all in one moment, I don't think it is right to call two T's for one act.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I guess it is a matter of whether you consider it two separate actions or one. I could go either way depending on the timeframe involved. I don't remember what the specific timing was in the video and I don't care to go watch it again but if it was the first response....then a T...then a moment before the jacket toss, that could easily be another. But if it was all in one moment, I don't think it is right to call two T's for one act.

Did you read what icallfouls posted? By rule the jacket toss is considered a separate act...

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Did you read what icallfouls posted? By rule the jacket toss is considered a separate act...

... for throwing the clothing on to the floor. In this case the clothing was thrown to an assistant coach. I don't have a horse in this race, just a point of fact.

[Adam]

Kinda reminds me of a summer game this year. Got the assistant for coming onto the court to protest a no-call, then got him again as he 'cheered' me while I reported the first T.

[BLydic]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... for throwing the clothing on to the floor. In this case the clothing was thrown to an assistant coach. I don't have a horse in this race, just a point of fact.

The first T was given while the jacket was on. If I am reading correctly, there's rule support for a second T in regards to throwing equipment or clothing on to the floor OR the emphatic removal of a jacket in response to a call/no call. A totally separate act and it seems pretty clear what they want, at least in the NCAA-M's ruleset.

I believe our varsity assigners would want this addressed in the same fashion, without warning.

[Rich]

It amazes me how many officials look for a reason to avoid properly ejecting a coach who clearly deserves it.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich

It amazes me how many officials look for a reason to avoid properly ejecting a coach who clearly deserves it.

So, are you suggesting that you'd eject a coach who yells at you while waving their arms around but wouldn't if they only yelled at you?

Or would you eject a coach who took their jacket off while yelling at you but not just for either one alone?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

So, are you suggesting that you'd eject a coach who yells at you while waving their arms around but wouldn't if they only yelled at you?

Or would you eject a coach who took their jacket off while yelling at you but not just for either one alone?

No, I'm saying that I'd eject a coach who had to be restrained, removed a coat, and threw it after receiving the first technical. And would lose no sleep over it.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... for throwing the clothing on to the floor. In this case the clothing was thrown to an assistant coach. I don't have a horse in this race, just a point of fact.

Leave something out? The operative word in icallfouls post would be the "OR"...

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Emphatically removing one’s coat in response to a call/no-call or throwing equipment or clothing on to the floor.

Originally Posted by rockyroad

By rule the jacket toss is considered a separate act...

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... for throwing the clothing on to the floor. In this case the clothing was thrown to an assistant coach. I don't have a horse in this race, just a point of fact.

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Leave something out? The operative word in icallfouls post would be the "OR"...

I was specifically referring to the toss, not the removal. According to the rule posted, removal can be charged with a technical, but a toss must be to the floor. Again, just a point of fact, not an opinion on the play.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I was specifically referring to the toss, not the removal. According to the rule posted, removal can be charged with a technical, but a toss must be to the floor. Again, just a point of fact, not an opinion on the play.

You left off some important words:

"including, but not limited to"

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Did you read what icallfouls posted? By rule the jacket toss is considered a separate act...

Like I said, I didn't go back and watch the video. icallfouls only asserted that he felt it was two separate actions. I didn't disagree with his opinion there (I didn't check the video to see). However, neither the rules nor icallfouls claim it is automatically two actions and T's just because a jacket comes off....just that the jacket removal in disgust is enough for a T.

If the Jacket came after the first T (perhaps in response to the T) then sure, it is clearly a separate act and two T's. But it is not necessarily two T's if they are done at the same time. It would be like giving two T's for a coach waiving their arms while yelling. They ruling doesn't say or even imply that you dissect one action into parts to give two Ts.

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I guess it is a matter of whether you consider it two separate actions or one. I could go either way depending on the timeframe involved. I don't remember what the specific timing was in the video and I don't care to go watch it again but if it was the first response....then a T...then a moment before the jacket toss, that could easily be another. But if it was all in one moment, I don't think it is right to call two T's for one act.

IMO, the first was in response to the no call, the second was in response to the T. It looked like one of those fights from HS, she ripped off the jacket like she wanted to fight the official.

I can see where some officials would say this is just one act, but she was responding to two different rulings.

Question: If you called the TF for the outburst/aggressive movement toward you, then why wouldn't you call a TF for the jacket?

For me, I hope that I would not think twice about it. At the level I am at, for this exchange, I will make that call in the game, and then to my assignors.

[tref]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

IMO, the first was in response to the no call, the second was in response to the T. It looked like one of those fights from HS, she ripped off the jacket like she wanted to fight the official.

I can see where some officials would say this is just one act, but she was responding to two different rulings.

Question: If you called the TF for the outburst/aggressive movement toward you, then why wouldn't you call a TF for the jacket?

For me, I hope that I would not think twice about it. At the level I am at, for this exchange, I will make that call in the game, and then to my assignors.

+1

What does POE stand for again
And why do they come up with POEs

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

IMO, the first was in response to the no call, the second was in response to the T. It looked like one of those fights from HS, she ripped off the jacket like she wanted to fight the official.

I can see where some officials would say this is just one act, but she was responding to two different rulings.

Question: If you called the TF for the outburst/aggressive movement toward you, then why wouldn't you call a TF for the jacket?

For me, I hope that I would not think twice about it. At the level I am at, for this exchange, I will make that call in the game, and then to my assignors.

It would be....if they were not the same act. If they outburst/aggressive movement included the Jacket Removal, it would only be 1.