Easiest Toss I've Ever Had

[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.

[fiasco]

LOL...you can't win for losing on this board.

I love all the knee-jerk assumption judgment that goes on in a lot of threads, like has gone on in this one, with certain people looking for some nit to pick to make the thread controversial or interesting.

Had I posted in my scenario that I didn't go over and give the coach the seatbelt, then he came flying off the bench and screamed at my partner and we had to toss him, then it would have been my fault for not properly communicating with the coach that he had lost his coaching box privileges. You can't win, no matter what you do!

Fact is, coaches in my area really don't know these kinds of rules, as some have assumed. I mean, in the same quarter, we had coaches for both sides complaining that why were we administering the common foul shots first and not administering the FTs for the Ts first. "You're thinking of college." I said to both of them. "In HS, fouls are administered in the order in which they occurred." More blank stares. That's just the way it is in my area. Coaches can't be bothered to learn the nuances of the rules like this. Which is fine. But then it falls upon the officials to do a bit of educating during the game. (Especially when the coach has already been T'd up and is standing at the edge of his coaching box not moving)

So do you think these bozos know anything about a coaching box? No. I had to inform the assistant coach of the offending team (after the HC had been tossed) that he didn't have a coaching box either and he had zero clue what I was talking about. So you're telling me that I should let him just do whatever he wants, let him stand and use the coaching box, then go over to him later and tell him to have a seat once he's already used the coaching box? No thanks, that approach only leads to more agitation.

My approach is to politely and professionally educate when the situation warrants. If the coach wants to flip out on me, that's on him and I'm not losing any sleep over it. Like I said, easy T. I'd rather T up a coach while I'm telling him he's got a seatbelt than have to T him later for using the coaching box that he's lost because I didn't communicate properly with him.

I guess I just don't believe in pussy footing around coaches just to avoid technical fouls. Does that mean I intentionally insert myself in situations in order to call technical fouls? No, I'm over that "bravado" phase and have moved to a point in my career where a "T" truly is like any other foul to me.

And I know what it means to have my partner's back, which is what I did. I communicated with him after his T that I was going over to give coach the seatbelt, so my partner didn't think I was going to give him a shoulder to cry on (in fact, I pregame this with all my partners). And I didn't stand there nodding my head to the coach and having the kind of body language that shows sympathy. This isn't my first rodeo.

The only question I had was whether or not, in that situation, it warrants a 3rd T for a coach who wants to continue jawing at you. I appreciate those of you who responded to my actual question.

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by fiasco

LOL...you can't win for losing on this board.

I love all the knee-jerk assumption judgment that goes on in a lot of threads, like has gone on in this one, with certain people looking for some nit to pick to make the thread controversial or interesting.

Had I posted in my scenario that I didn't go over and give the coach the seatbelt, then he came flying off the bench and screamed at my partner and we had to toss him, then it would have been my fault for not properly communicating with the coach that he had lost his coaching box privileges. You can't win, no matter what you do!

Fact is, coaches in my area really don't know these kinds of rules, as some have assumed. I mean, in the same quarter, we had coaches for both sides complaining that why were we administering the common foul shots first and not administering the FTs for the Ts first. "You're thinking of college." I said to both of them. "In HS, fouls are administered in the order in which they occurred." More blank stares. That's just the way it is in my area. Coaches can't be bothered to learn the nuances of the rules like this. Which is fine. But then it falls upon the officials to do a bit of educating during the game. (Especially when the coach has already been T'd up and is standing at the edge of his coaching box not moving)

So do you think these bozos know anything about a coaching box? No. I had to inform the assistant coach of the offending team (after the HC had been tossed) that he didn't have a coaching box either and he had zero clue what I was talking about. So you're telling me that I should let him just do whatever he wants, let him stand and use the coaching box, then go over to him later and tell him to have a seat once he's already used the coaching box? No thanks, that approach only leads to more agitation.

My approach is to politely and professionally educate when the situation warrants. If the coach wants to flip out on me, that's on him and I'm not losing any sleep over it. Like I said, easy T. I'd rather T up a coach while I'm telling him he's got a seatbelt than have to T him later for using the coaching box that he's lost because I didn't communicate properly with him.

I guess I just don't believe in pussy footing around coaches just to avoid technical fouls. Does that mean I intentionally insert myself in situations in order to call technical fouls? No, I'm over that "bravado" phase and have moved to a point in my career where a "T" truly is like any other foul to me.

And I know what it means to have my partner's back, which is what I did. I communicated with him after his T that I was going over to give coach the seatbelt, so my partner didn't think I was going to give him a shoulder to cry on (in fact, I pregame this with all my partners). And I didn't stand there nodding my head to the coach and having the kind of body language that shows sympathy. This isn't my first rodeo.

The only question I had was whether or not, in that situation, it warrants a 3rd T for a coach who wants to continue jawing at you. I appreciate those of you who responded to my actual question.

To be clear, I wasn't implying in any of my posts that you were playing good cop and giving the coach your shoulder to cry on. I was kind of lamenting that happening with guys I've worked with, and your thread was an easy one to relate to. I think you guys handled it well.

And for the record, you are correct about the knee jerk reactions on this board and the nit-picking just to make things interesting.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by zm1283

To be clear, I wasn't implying in any of my posts that you were playing good cop and giving the coach your shoulder to cry on. I was kind of lamenting that happening with guys I've worked with, and your thread was an easy one to relate to. I think you guys handled it well.

And for the record, you are correct about the knee jerk reactions on this board and the nit-picking just to make things interesting.

No worries. I wasn't referring to your posts, and I agree with what you said earlier, in fact. That's why, as I said, I pregame that stuff with my partners, so they know in that situation if I go over to the coach, it's to inform him of his loss of the coaching box rather than to give him a shoulder to cry on.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by fiasco

The only question I had was whether or not, in that situation, it warrants a 3rd T for a coach who wants to continue jawing at you. I appreciate those of you who responded to my actual question.

Rule #1 of Internet boards -- the OP doesn't control the direction threads go.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by Rich

Rule #1 of Internet boards -- the OP doesn't control the direction threads go.

Control? Certainly not.

But that doesn't mean the OP can't comment on the direction the thread goes.

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by fiasco

LOL...you can't win for losing on this board.

I love all the knee-jerk assumption judgment that goes on in a lot of threads, like has gone on in this one, with certain people looking for some nit to pick to make the thread controversial or interesting.

Had I posted in my scenario that I didn't go over and give the coach the seatbelt, then he came flying off the bench and screamed at my partner and we had to toss him, then it would have been my fault for not properly communicating with the coach that he had lost his coaching box privileges. You can't win, no matter what you do!

Fact is, coaches in my area really don't know these kinds of rules, as some have assumed. I mean, in the same quarter, we had coaches for both sides complaining that why were we administering the common foul shots first and not administering the FTs for the Ts first. "You're thinking of college." I said to both of them. "In HS, fouls are administered in the order in which they occurred." More blank stares. That's just the way it is in my area. Coaches can't be bothered to learn the nuances of the rules like this. Which is fine. But then it falls upon the officials to do a bit of educating during the game. (Especially when the coach has already been T'd up and is standing at the edge of his coaching box not moving)

So do you think these bozos know anything about a coaching box? No. I had to inform the assistant coach of the offending team (after the HC had been tossed) that he didn't have a coaching box either and he had zero clue what I was talking about. So you're telling me that I should let him just do whatever he wants, let him stand and use the coaching box, then go over to him later and tell him to have a seat once he's already used the coaching box? No thanks, that approach only leads to more agitation.

My approach is to politely and professionally educate when the situation warrants. If the coach wants to flip out on me, that's on him and I'm not losing any sleep over it. Like I said, easy T. I'd rather T up a coach while I'm telling him he's got a seatbelt than have to T him later for using the coaching box that he's lost because I didn't communicate properly with him.

I guess I just don't believe in pussy footing around coaches just to avoid technical fouls. Does that mean I intentionally insert myself in situations in order to call technical fouls? No, I'm over that "bravado" phase and have moved to a point in my career where a "T" truly is like any other foul to me.

And I know what it means to have my partner's back, which is what I did. I communicated with him after his T that I was going over to give coach the seatbelt, so my partner didn't think I was going to give him a shoulder to cry on (in fact, I pregame this with all my partners). And I didn't stand there nodding my head to the coach and having the kind of body language that shows sympathy. This isn't my first rodeo.

The only question I had was whether or not, in that situation, it warrants a 3rd T for a coach who wants to continue jawing at you. I appreciate those of you who responded to my actual question.

You have assumed that this particular coach doesn't know the rule upon receiving a TF. It is not your job to educate. Coaches are supposed to have some sort of rules knowledge. It helps them when they cry for 3 seconds, traveling and all the other stuff they ask for. If you are going to educate during the game it is going to be a long night for everyone. Coaches know. My 5th graders coach knows. They have seen and they have heard about it from other coaches, fans, athletic directors, and others.

The point was that you are not required to tell a coach they no longer have use of the coaches box. You took upon yourself to interject yourself into partners crap. Let them live with it. You can always inform the coach after the FT's, the subsequent inbound play, or at some other point in the game. If you think it is your job to educate and inform them of their new conditions you also needed to state that there are still times when they can get up: to request TO's, spontaneously react to a good play, replace a DQ'd player, etc. Now that would have been some educating.

Do the coach, the game and your partner a favor by staying away from the coach for a few moments. Delaying these instructions does not harm the game, your credibility, or your crew. It looks like you are over there to dump more crap on the coach (who already thought the TF was BS) under the guise of backing up your partner. If my partner calls a weak, mysterious TF, I will back them up. I won't go there to tell the coach they lost the privilege only to hear them chirp something else. Instead of moving on, you became the highlight of the night. Congrats on the fiasco and being the talk of the local watering hole.

As far as a 3rd TF, please indicate what rule there is for issuing a 3rd Direct TF to the coach. Guess someone else needs some education.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

You have assumed that this particular coach doesn't know the rule upon receiving a TF. It is not your job to educate. Coaches are supposed to have some sort of rules knowledge. It helps them when they cry for 3 seconds, traveling and all the other stuff they ask for? They know. They have seen and they have heard about it from other coaches, fans, athletic directors, and others. If you are going to educate during the game it is going to be a long night for everyone.

The point was that you are not required to tell a coach they no longer have use of the coaches box. You took upon yourself to interject yourself into partners crap. Let them live with it. You can always inform the coach after the FT's, the subsequent inbound play, or at some other point in the game. If you think it is your job to educate and inform them of their new conditions you also needed to state that there are still times when they can get up: to request TO's, spontaneously react to a good play, replace a DQ'd player, etc. Now that would have been some educating.

Do the coach, the game and your partner a favor by staying away from the coach for a few moments. Delaying these instructions does not harm the game, your credibility, or your crew. It looks like you are over there to dump more crap on the coach (who already thought the TF was BS) under the guise of backing up your partner. If my partner calls a weak, unknown TF, I certainly will back them up. I won't go there to tell them they lost the privilege only to hear them chirp something else. Instead of moving on, you became the highlight of the night. Congrats on the fiasco of the night.

As far as a 3rd TF, please indicate what rule there is for issuing a 3rd Direct TF to the coach. Then you will be getting some educ-ma-cation from your assignor. Assuming you get educated at all.

Once again, you're talking out of your rear end without any clue. It's standard procedure in my association to inform the coaches. That's the bottom line. Doesn't really matter what you say, so you can take your advice and stick it in your ear.

I called my assignor after the game to assist him in filling out the state report and he said "Great job, you did exactly what you were supposed to."

So go find a jamboree where you can order around some newbie officials and get your rocks off.

As someone wise used to say, "Lah, me."

[fiasco]

If you think it is your job to educate and inform them of their new conditions you also needed to state that there are still times when they can get up: to request TO's, spontaneously react to a good play, replace a DQ'd player, etc. Now that would have been some educating.

Oh, fancy that. This happens to be the exact conversation I had with the assistant coach after I ran the head coach. It's too bad the head coach got mouthy before I could get to this part.

Lah, me.

[VaTerp]

"The call stands, coach. You'll have to have a seat."

This is the quote that I don't like and that I think escalates the situation instead of diffusing it. And based on experiences in my association, my assignor would not like either. Of course, that JMO.

But I do LOL at the OP getting so defensive. If you're assignor wants things handled that way then more power to you. But it doesnt meant others arent going to comment how they see fit and offer their $0.02 based on their perspectives and how it may or may not help others reading the thread.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by fiasco

Once again, you're talking out of your rear end without any clue. It's standard procedure in my association to inform the coaches. That's the bottom line. Doesn't really matter what you say, so you can take your advice and stick it in your ear.

I called my assignor after the game to assist him in filling out the state report and he said "Great job, you did exactly what you were supposed to."

So go find a jamboree where you can order around some newbie officials and get your rocks off.

As someone wise used to say, "Lah, me."

Didn't you come here with this story? You expected everyone to just say nothing about the details?

Now you mad because someone said something that you did not like?

Peace