Easiest Toss I've Ever Had
 

Girls V last Friday night. Middle of the third quarter. My partner calls a foul, reports to the table, then T's up Team B head coach. (He said later the coach said to him "At least you're being consistent")

My partner goes to administer free throws while I have a chat with the coach.

"Coach, I just need to inform you that, by rule, you've lost your coaching box for the night."

"What's his deal? I was talking to my player, not him. So you're just going to let him T me up like that?"

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

"Your partner is an idiot."

Booooop. Bye bye coach. I take a few strides to the table to record the T and ejection.

He then proceeds to follow me to the table and tell me he's going to stand here and give me a piece of his mind for as long as possible before he leaves the gym.

Unfortunately, I ask at the table and game management is nowhere to be found, so I turn to the coach, who is still yelling.

"Coach, you have exactly three seconds to start moving toward the door before I consider ending this game with a forfeit by your team."

He finally shuts up and goes out the door.

After we're done administering free throws, I have the ball for the throw-in and we notice he's just outside the gym doors, trying to watch the game. We finally locate game management and they escort him out of the building.

I had a talk after the game with the athletic director and let him know we always need someone on hand and available should a situation like that arise.

Crazy quarter. Just a few minutes after that, my partner tagged a girl from the same time for giving me the "T" signal after a foul call on her. Visiting team was up by about 15 before all the shenanigans. Home team came back to tie it, but pooped away the game in the 4th quarter and ended up losing by 12.

Here's my question. Obviously after the second T he's gone, but would you have considered giving him a third for sitting there yelling after he's been ejected?

I am by no means an expert on this one, and am in class away from my books, but depending on the length of time he stays or severity of what he says, couldn't it be a T for unsporting acts by disqualified personnel? Would certainly have to be some form of egregious act for me to do it.

I remember the "leaving the court in a timely fashion" thing is mentioned a lot by commentators in the NBA with regard to fines being issued following tosses, but I'm not sure if that is an actual rule or if there is something analogous for Fed.

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

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

What a fiasco!

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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"

I'm not saying I'd hang around and have a conversation. I'm just saying if my partner spent a few seconds, I wouldn't be bothered by it.

I had experience in this area this weekend -- my partner (same official) whacked an assistant coach both Friday night and Saturday afternoon. Both times I administered the free throws while he went division line opposite (2-person). Before he administered the throw-in, I simply said, "You need to have a seat." They wanted to engage me, but I was too busy showing them my back.

To answer your question: I'd probably answer a question if they had one on the timeout (and only if it was a quick one that wasn't aggressively asked), but if they started arguing or making statements, I'd probably be walking away.

:confused: So you are saying you and I agree then?

:confused: Second post in a row I'm confused about...we are in agreement then? What you did is exactly what I would have done except I would have probably said, "Coach, because of the technical foul, you must remain seated for the remainder of the game." For me - former military - saying what you said will come off too hard for some people.

In the situation with my question, I would walk the coach back to the huddle and 1) if everything with the coach was OK I would tell him/her we can talk about it later or 2) if everything wasn't OK, I would tell the coach that they aren't going to use a timeout to talk to us.

Nothing to be confused about -- you and I would probably do similar things. I get the sense we'd do a lot of things on the court similarly. However, I'm OK if a partner wants to do things a bit differently, even if it's not something I would do personally. I know the guys I work with and know they wouldn't throw me under the bus. Some of them have different styles than me, though.

Regarding the question -- I always try to "walk" coaches back -- whether it's the dugout in baseball, the sideline in football, or the huddle in basketball. It's good practice.

This conversation reminded me that my partner whacked two assistants in consecutive nights, though. I'll have to ask him who pissed in his Cheerios. :D

Correct Wording ...
 

Not true. Rather it's, "Coach, because of the technical foul, you cannot stand and use the coaching box for the remainder of the game."

As the game progresses, there will be times that the coach will be allowed to stand: request a timeout; ask about a mistake, or a correctable error; stand during timeouts, and intermissions; acknowledge players during substitutions; and spontaneously react to a great play by one of his players. (There's probably more, but I'm at work and I don't have my books.)

This is a great question.

Are you going to deny the request for TO? My guess is no.

It is always up to us if we want to talk in these situations. If they want to call the TO that is up to them.

I have handled it a few ways.
1) Go opposite and not engage the coach. Just because they want to talk about it, doesn't mean I want to.
2) I have granted a TO after my call and told a coach "you've got 10 seconds to say what you want about that call, no profanity, no yelling." I have not had to do this very often but it helps move the situation along. The coach gets makes their point, I listen, then I move away.
3) If they want to talk to partner(s), it is up to them. But I am not hanging around for the coach to discuss a call by my partner.

we are in agreement :)

Depends on which supervisor I'm working for that night. :D

I will make that change. Thanks.

Another Option ...
 

Or even better, charge him with the second technical foul and make him sit on the cold bus. Make sure that he wears his seat belt. Yeah. That's a better option.

You know what happens when you assume...

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

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.

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. :D

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.

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.

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. :)

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.

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." :rolleyes:

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. :rolleyes:

"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.

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

Thanks for your comments, Jeff.

You gave the exact instructions to the the Asst Coach, AFTER you ran the HC. Too late. And you are STILL over by the coaches crapping on them. They have no where to go to get away from you. You have all the power because you have a whistle and get to enforce the rules, you can leave the coaches whenever you want, you can give instructions all night long and they have to sit there and take it because they cannot get away from you.

There were plenty of comments that suggested you do something else. There was no immediate need to address a situation that was not escalating until you decided to educate.

In the end you won, you had the biggest tool on the court that night.

And BTW, I asked you what rules support you have for a 3rd direct TF on a coach? Just keep whacking away, you'll chop down that tree eventually.

My thoughts also. Why give all those details about the game? Why not just post:

Fiasco is allowed to talk about a whole bunch of things that have nothing to do with the question, but no one else is? :confused:

Fair enough. I understand what you're getting at, and I'll put this in my pocket for next time. Thanks.

I will say I think it's incredibly difficult to communicate all the nuances, tones, inflections, reactions, body language, emotions and energy that go on in a particular situation.

Which is why, in a forum such as this one, taking an approach such as "Hey, fiasco, instead of what you said, what if you had tried XYZ?" is probably a more meaningful and productive approach to a discussion instead saying "Well, you crapped all over that coach, way to go."

That's just childish, and it's picking for an argument just to pick for an argument.

I accept the blame for taking the bait.

I've never said no one is allowed to question anything. It's the manner in which things on here are discussed. People feeling like it's their calling in life to get on their high horse and give another official a talking to about how they are approaching their game. I've seen it before, and I'll see it again.

If it really makes you feel better about yourself to come down on another official and talk about things out of context and offer an opinion that's based on nothing but your own interpretation of the situation instead of asking questions first to clarify just to show how much more experience or knowledge you have, then by all means, have at it.

I know that kind of official in real life, and when I come across them, it's a short pre-game, get in, get done, get out. They think they have the answer to everything and are accountable for nothing. I don't have too much patience for that.

You're free to act however you want, whether that's here on this forum or out on the court. I'm not trying to tell you not to say anything. I'm saying take a look at how you say things.

My goodness, knock it off. All of you.

Cleanup on aisle 3.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.......:D

:eek:

Agree 100% with the bolded, which is one of the reasons I am not trying to be overly critical in this situation.

My initial comment in this thread was about a situation I had and how I think I could have handled it better and learned from the experience.

And I don't think I've read anyone say Fiasco handled this horribly, he should have done XYZ. I think it's more along the lines of this is why it's best to not engage the coach at all after our partners stick them. Because almost anything we say, no matter how well intentioned is more likely to escalate the situation than diffuse it and in some cases can make it appear as if you are coddling the coach or undermining your partner.

Officiating is an art not a science. Nobody here is perfect and I think we all know that. And I do agree with you that people on here can nitpick and come across a little high and mighty a little too often for my taste.

But my sense of this thread is that people are just giving their perspective and suggestions on why they handle things certain ways. The experience you shared should be used as a learning opportunity for everyone. No need to attack or defend the way the situation was handled IMO.

And with that, the thread is closed.