5 Fouls

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by Rich

I always go over this procedure with the timer. I'm going to the coach first and then I'm *immediately* coming to you to start the clock. One horn at 5 seconds. I'll handle the rest.

I've watched too many partners dawdle with this and essentially grant the teams a timeout while we wait. Not me.

I agree that we shouldn't let this become a timeout, but I do one thing: I ask the coach if he/she has a sub or if he/she needs time. If they say they have someone and the sub goes to the table, we play. If they need/want time, I go to the table and have them start the time. IME the coach often has a sub and we can just continue with the game.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by tomegun

I agree that we shouldn't let this become a timeout, but I do one thing: I ask the coach if he/she has a sub or if he/she needs time. If they say they have someone and the sub goes to the table, we play. If they need/want time, I go to the table and have them start the time. IME the coach often has a sub and we can just continue with the game.

I like this suggestion. I'm going to use it. Thanks.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by tomegun

I agree that we shouldn't let this become a timeout, but I do one thing: I ask the coach if he/she has a sub or if he/she needs time. If they say they have someone and the sub goes to the table, we play. If they need/want time, I go to the table and have them start the time. IME the coach often has a sub and we can just continue with the game.

And, 50% of the time, the sub is already at the table, so I just verify with the coach or sub that the sub is coming in for #xx.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by tomegun

I agree that we shouldn't let this become a timeout, but I do one thing: I ask the coach if he/she has a sub or if he/she needs time. If they say they have someone and the sub goes to the table, we play. If they need/want time, I go to the table and have them start the time. IME the coach often has a sub and we can just continue with the game.

Nice idea; but if the coached is pissed or has been a problem during the game I'm not initiating ANY conversation that might give him/her an opportunity to say something derogatory.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by billyu2

Nice idea; but if the coached is pissed or has been a problem during the game I'm not initiating ANY conversation that might give him/her an opportunity to say something derogatory.

I think that goes without saying. But many fifth foul scenarios are not contentious.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by Rich

I think that goes without saying. But many fifth foul scenarios are not contentious.

I agree. But for newer officials, it may be wise not to make this your routine procedure. Use some caution.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rich

Many fifth foul scenarios are not contentious.

You're probably right, but my most recent head coach ejection, a few years ago, was in a "fifth foul" scenario.

Ejection ...

(Note: It may be worth your while to read through the entire attached link. There's some classic Jurassic Referee stuff in the link, and one of the few times that I was on Jurassic Referee's good side. Poor JugglingReferee was not on Jurassic Referee's good side in this thread, but he did a nice job stating his case against a relentless debate opponent. I really miss Jurassic Referee, but he lives on, giving good advice, in cyberspace.)

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by tomegun

I agree that we shouldn't let this become a timeout, but I do one thing: I ask the coach if he/she has a sub or if he/she needs time. If they say they have someone and the sub goes to the table, we play. If they need/want time, I go to the table and have them start the time. IME the coach often has a sub and we can just continue with the game.

yeah until they are mad at you for fouling out their player. Then they take as much time as they can get away with before they get a tech. Just follow the procedure outlined and that will save you any headaches with coaches.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

yeah until they are made at you for fouling out their player. Then they take as much time as they can get away with before they get a tech. Just follow the procedure outlined and that will save you any headaches with coaches.

Had that last summer. I think he was surprised at what happened at twenty seconds.

[Mregor]

1.1.1 Here, the non-calling official (2-man) has to notify the coach.

[mj]

Originally Posted by Mregor

1.1.1 Here, the non-calling official (2-man) has to notify the coach.

This mechanic to me is idiotic. I understand if you expect confrontation you should do it (maybe). But to do it all the time makes no sense. Part of our job is to explain certain calls/non-calls to coaches. You have to be able to communicate with them. Now if you follow the mechanic and have the non-calling official notify the coach, to me it looks like you are going to hide in the corner and let your partner take care of the dirty work.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by mj

I understand if you expect confrontation you should do it (maybe). But to do it all the time makes no sense. Part of our job is to explain certain calls/non-calls to coaches. You have to be able to communicate with them.

From my pregame: Game management: If I call a fifth foul on a player, I’ll tell the coach, unless I think it’s going to be a problem.

[Mregor]

Originally Posted by mj

This mechanic to me is idiotic. I understand if you expect confrontation you should do it (maybe). But to do it all the time makes no sense. Part of our job is to explain certain calls/non-calls to coaches. You have to be able to communicate with them. Now if you follow the mechanic and have the non-calling official notify the coach, to me it looks like you are going to hide in the corner and let your partner take care of the dirty work.

Didn't say I agree with it, but when the state assignor says this is the mechanic they want used, you need to do as they say. When in Rome...

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by mj

This mechanic to me is idiotic. I understand if you expect confrontation you should do it (maybe). But to do it all the time makes no sense. Part of our job is to explain certain calls/non-calls to coaches. You have to be able to communicate with them. Now if you follow the mechanic and have the non-calling official notify the coach, to me it looks like you are going to hide in the corner and let your partner take care of the dirty work.

I do not agree that it is our job to explain a call we made. It is our job to inform them they have a player that fouled out. It is a courtesy based on their actions that might get me to explain a call. And certainly if a player has fouled out, I am not explaining a whole lot. As stated, by far most times the coach already knows and already has a sub at the table or within seconds of reporting.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Adam

Had that last summer. I think he was surprised at what happened at twenty seconds.

I can only imagine. I had a similar thing in a varsity game a few years ago. He figured I'd ask and then ask again and then ask again. He was wrong.