Easiest Toss I've Ever Had

[Adam]

You can, but I wouldn't. I'd do just as you did.

[Indianaref]

I think you did just fine, I would have done the same.

[icallfouls]

I really don't like it when a partner goes over and tells the coach they have lost the use of the coaches box. I do not have my books with me at the moment and I can't find any reference to it online being the appropriate mechanic.

The coaches know the rule. I would say it is likely the only rule they understand the best.

Even so, in my opinion, you went over to the coach and it only exacerbated the situation. You went to him, he had no place to go to avoid your comment on something he already knows. I think you made the situation worse in that moment.

There is nothing good by going over there. It looks like you are trying to coddle the coach after your partner made a call he disagreed with.

If he needs to be reminded, there is a better way to do it. He probably still needs a moment to collect himself.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

I really don't like it when a partner goes over and tells the coach they have lost the use of the coaches box. I do not have my books with me at the moment and I can't find any reference to it online being the appropriate mechanic.

The coaches know the rule. I would say it is likely the only rule they understand the best.

Even so, in my opinion, you went over to the coach and it only exacerbated the situation. You went to him, he had no place to go to avoid your comment on something he already knows. I think you made the situation worse in that moment.

There is nothing good by going over there. It looks like you are trying to coddle the coach after your partner made a call he disagreed with.

If he needs to be reminded, there is a better way to do it. He probably still needs a moment to collect himself.

I agree and disagree with what you are saying. I think a non-calling official should go over to inform the coach that he/she has lost the coaching box and must remain seated. Some coaches mysteriously forget this rule when it applies to them. The part I don't like from the OP is everything after that. From a distance, it does give the appearance that the official is giving the coach a shoulder to cry on. In this particular situation, getting away from the coach after telling him about the coaches box would have either ended the conversation or made the second T a no-brainer.

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by tomegun

I agree and disagree with what you are saying. I think a non-calling official should go over to inform the coach that he/she has lost the coaching box and must remain seated. Some coaches mysteriously forget this rule when it applies to them. The part I don't like from the OP is everything after that. From a distance, it does give the appearance that the official is giving the coach a shoulder to cry on. In this particular situation, getting away from the coach after telling him about the coaches box would have either ended the conversation or made the second T a no-brainer.

I HATE it when partners talk to coaches about anything other than "You've lost the box" when I give a technical. I don't even like it when partners stand there and talk to them after I stick one of their players. It definitely gives the appearance that he's trying to play "good cop" to your bad cop and it makes the calling official look bad.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by zm1283

I HATE it when partners talk to coaches about anything other than "You've lost the box" when I give a technical. I don't even like it when partners stand there and talk to them after I stick one of their players. It definitely gives the appearance that he's trying to play "good cop" to your bad cop and it makes the calling official look bad.

I work with a small set of partners and I'm fine with one of them doing whatever he deems necessary. I know, however, they wouldn't throw me under the bus.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by Rich

I work with a small set of partners and I'm fine with one of them doing whatever he deems necessary. I know, however, they wouldn't throw me under the bus.

What if the opposing coach had a loud opinion about it and how it looks?

Can you tell me what good can come from this? Seriously, if a coach does something to earn a T, that coach has to live with his/her actions. Letting the coach know that he/she must remain seated is a courtesy and that is all I can think of that needs to be said at the time.

A loosely related question: if a coach was unhappy with a call or non-call, would you let them talk to you about it if they call a timeout?

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by Rich

I work with a small set of partners and I'm fine with one of them doing whatever he deems necessary. I know, however, they wouldn't throw me under the bus.

I can see how that would work out okay. I'm confident that most of the guys I work with would never throw me under the bus either, but there are a few every now and then I'm not sure about. If I'm the non-calling official, I don't stand near the coach because I don't want to be perceived as coddling him.

[Loudwhistle2]

Originally Posted by Rich

I work with a small set of partners and I'm fine with one of them doing whatever he deems necessary. I know, however, they wouldn't throw me under the bus.

I agree with Rich. If It would have been my game I wouldn't have said anything to the coach until after the free throws to see if he was going to sit and comply. If he is still standing then I quickly go by him and say, "coaching box is gone!" That usually gets the hint across and you get he heck out of there.

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by tomegun

I agree and disagree with what you are saying. I think a non-calling official should go over to inform the coach that he/she has lost the coaching box and must remain seated. Some coaches mysteriously forget this rule when it applies to them. The part I don't like from the OP is everything after that. From a distance, it does give the appearance that the official is giving the coach a shoulder to cry on. In this particular situation, getting away from the coach after telling him about the coaches box would have either ended the conversation or made the second T a no-brainer.

Calling his partner an idiot is worthy, don't get me wrong.

So what if he mysteriously forgets, it could be that the coach thinks he is responding to good play by his team after the moment of the T has passed. When the officials are moving by, just calmly remind the coach. Most of the time they will comply because they have had a chance to move on. This was not the case. The non-calling official is exerting control at a time when it is not necessary.

Fisaco did not have to inform the coach of the rule - which I have no doubt is known. Even so, all he had to do was deliver the message and move on. The coach made another comment and asked a question - it was a question designed to divide the crew or in the hopes that the coach could find someone to trust. Instead Fiasco inadvertently kept the fire burning. Fiasco thought he would have the last word and the coach would simply comply, when it might have been better to let the coach have the last word.

He would never have been in position to hear the coach say his partner was a idiot if he stayed away. If you still feel like it is something that needs to be said, wait until after the 2nd FT, or when the ball is about to be inbounded. The coach likely will be ready to move on by then.

I agree with the earlier post - "What a fiasco"

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

Calling his partner an idiot is worthy, don't get me wrong.

Fisaco did not have to inform the coach of the rule - which I have no doubt is known. Even so, all he had to do was deliver the message and move on. The coach made another comment and asked a question - that did not need to be answered. Fiasco put all the attention on himself and the coach. Fiasco had to have the last word, when it might have been better to let the coach have the last word.

He would never have been in position to hear the coach say his partner was a idiot.

I agree with the earlier post - "What a fiasco"

So you are saying you and I agree then?

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by tomegun

So you are saying you and I agree then?

we are in agreement

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

I really don't like it when a partner goes over and tells the coach they have lost the use of the coaches box. I do not have my books with me at the moment and I can't find any reference to it online being the appropriate mechanic.

The coaches know the rule. I would say it is likely the only rule they understand the best.

Even so, in my opinion, you went over to the coach and it only exacerbated the situation. You went to him, he had no place to go to avoid your comment on something he already knows. I think you made the situation worse in that moment.

There is nothing good by going over there. It looks like you are trying to coddle the coach after your partner made a call he disagreed with.

If he needs to be reminded, there is a better way to do it. He probably still needs a moment to collect himself.

You know what happens when you assume...

[JRutledge]

I make it very clear to coaches that I am not the sounding board for their BS. I might go to the coach and say they have to sit and then walk away. Not my job to tell them the rule. They know the rule. Now if the coach yelled "Your partner is an idiot" then that is different. I just learned from previous situations that I do not want to be around to explain much to a coach. Coaches feel like we own them something and we do not.

Peace

[VaTerp]

Last week my partner had what IMO was a quick T. He went opposite, other partner administered, I went table side.

Coach still standing says, "Can I ask you a question?" I back over toward him. Here's the exchange:

Coach, "You and I been doing this a long time (odd statement, I was the R but probably 20 years younger than both my partners), isnt he suppose to at least give me a warning."

"No, we don't have to."

"All I said was that was a travel. That's ridiculous. I want his name."

"It's in the book."

"I want his full name."

"You can email XX ,(our assigner)"

"I've known XX for twenty years"

"Well you should have his email then coach, and I need to tell you that you've lost the coaching box for the rest of the game." Walk away.

Coach says, "I know that as he goes to take a seat."

The whole exchange did not take that long but it took longer than I would have liked. And after giving it some thought it probably did have the appearance of me being a shoulder to cry on and somewhat undermining my partner.

I've worked with some guys who say once we stick a coach he wants everyone in the crew to stay away from him for a while. He's been stuck, he knows the rule. He'll get to his seat soon enough. If not, give him a quick reminder. If they want to talk about something later maybe they'll get a chance later, maybe they won't.

I mentioned that IMO it was a quick T b/c I do think that played a factor in me being more willing to go over and engage him for a second. Had it been a more obvious T I would have likely stayed away.

But moving forward I think I like the guideline of everyone staying away for a while. IMO it looks better as a crew and much more harm than good can come from engaging the coach so quickly after a T as evidenced by the OP.