How tight is the seat belt?

[Smitty]

In my association, we were specifically told this season to give a little more respect to assistant coaches. The leadership of our association had a sit down with a bunch of coaches last off season and got their top list of gripes about officials and the top gripe was how we treat assistant coaches. Not that we should take any crap from them but we should afford them some respect until they prove they don't deserve it. We allow them to ask questions at timeouts as long as it's done in a respectful manner. Part of the reasoning is that they will be tomorrow's head coaches. I'm fine with it - it's caused me to rethink my philosophy on assistant coaches as I was always told they have no rights in the past. I kind of like it because I do think we tend to treat them like turds right off the bat and that may be unfair (some of the time).

As far as the OP, since the T was on the assistant, and as long as the coach was coaching during those 2 second standups, I would probably ignore it. Why stir the pot?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Smitty

In my association, we were specifically told this season to give a little more respect to assistant coaches. The leadership of our association had a sit down with a bunch of coaches last off season and got their top list of gripes about officials and the top gripe was how we treat assistant coaches. Not that we should take any crap from them but we should afford them some respect until they prove they don't deserve it. We allow them to ask questions at timeouts as long as it's done in a respectful manner. Part of the reasoning is that they will be tomorrow's head coaches. I'm fine with it - it's caused me to rethink my philosophy on assistant coaches as I was always told they have no rights in the past. I kind of like it because I do think we tend to treat them like turds right off the bat and that may be unfair (some of the time).

As far as the OP, since the T was on the assistant, and as long as the coach was coaching during those 2 second standups, I would probably ignore it. Why stir the pot?

My main problem with assistant coaches are that they talk when we are already talking to their HC.

And I who really gives a darn they they will be the HC. If they want HC privileges, then get hired then I will treat you with that level of respect. And they need to know that it is in their best interest if for no other reason but to have good communication with the officials is to have one person doing the talking.

Peace

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by jrutledge

my main problem with assistant coaches are that they talk when we are already talking to their hc.

And i who really gives a darn they they will be the hc. If they want hc privileges, then get hired then i will treat you with that level of respect. And they need to know that it is in their best interest if for no other reason but to have good communication with the officials is to have one person doing the talking.

Peace

+1

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by jrutledge

my main problem with assistant coaches are that they talk when we are already talking to their hc.

And i who really gives a darn they they will be the hc. If they want hc privileges, then get hired then i will treat you with that level of respect. And they need to know that it is in their best interest if for no other reason but to have good communication with the officials is to have one person doing the talking.

Peace

+2

[jeschmit]

Seeing this OP made me think of what a coach asked me last week. He got T'd up at halftime, so he was seat-belted for the second half. During a timeout he asked me if he could stand for spontaneous reaction to made baskets or good plays (like bench personal are allowed to do). I told him the only time he could stand after he'd been seat-belted was to get our attention for a timeout.

Can he stand in those situations of spontaneous reaction to plays by his team? I honestly don't know...

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by jeschmit

Seeing this OP made me think of what a coach asked me last week. He got T'd up at halftime, so he was seat-belted for the second half. During a timeout he asked me if he could stand for spontaneous reaction to made baskets or good plays (like bench personal are allowed to do). I told him the only time he could stand after he'd been seat-belted was to get our attention for a timeout.

Can he stand in those situations of spontaneous reaction to plays by his team? I honestly don't know...

Yes he can, it is in the rule.

10-5.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by jeschmit

During a timeout he asked me if he could stand for spontaneous reaction to made baskets or good plays (like bench personal are allowed to do). I told him the only time he could stand after he'd been seat-belted was to get our attention for a timeout. Can he stand in those situations of spontaneous reaction to plays by his team?

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Yes he can, it is in the rule 10-5.

After the head coach loses his coaching box privileges, he still may, by rule, legally stand to spontaneously react to an outstanding play by a team member; to request a timeout, or signal his players to request a timeout; to confer with personnel at the scorer’s table to request a timeout that a correctable error, or a timing, scoring, or alternating possession mistake be prevented, or rectified; to replace or remove a disqualified, or injured, player, or player directed to leave the game; during a charged timeout, or the intermission between quarters, and extra periods; and to acknowledge a replaced player.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Smitty

In my association, we were specifically told this season to give a little more respect to assistant coaches. The leadership of our association had a sit down with a bunch of coaches last off season and got their top list of gripes about officials and the top gripe was how we treat assistant coaches. Not that we should take any crap from them but we should afford them some respect until they prove they don't deserve it. We allow them to ask questions at timeouts as long as it's done in a respectful manner. Part of the reasoning is that they will be tomorrow's head coaches. I'm fine with it - it's caused me to rethink my philosophy on assistant coaches as I was always told they have no rights in the past. I kind of like it because I do think we tend to treat them like turds right off the bat and that may be unfair (some of the time).

I don't think most of us "treat them like turds", and most of us will answer a question if it's done in a respectful manner. But NO crap from them. Zero. They do not have that right. If you don't clamp down on that, you get a situation which used to be more common - an assistant who seemed to be the designated complainer - so that when the T finally came it was not on the HC.

As far as the OP, since the T was on the assistant, and as long as the coach was coaching during those 2 second standups, I would probably ignore it. Why stir the pot?

I agree about not stirring the pot, but the rule is there for a reason. What happens when you ignore it 5 times, then the OTHER team gets a seatbelt and he stands up, but says something directly to you (instead of coaching). You T that up, and the legitimate question comes --- why did you T me the first time and never T'd the other guy who stood up 5 times? (He doesn't know what was said on the other end).

You don't have to "stir the pot", you can simply remind him that the seatbelt does not include standing up to coach every few minutes. MOST of the time, that will be enough.

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by Smitty

In my association, we were specifically told this season to give a little more respect to assistant coaches. The leadership of our association had a sit down with a bunch of coaches last off season and got their top list of gripes about officials and the top gripe was how we treat assistant coaches. Not that we should take any crap from them but we should afford them some respect until they prove they don't deserve it. We allow them to ask questions at timeouts as long as it's done in a respectful manner. Part of the reasoning is that they will be tomorrow's head coaches. I'm fine with it - it's caused me to rethink my philosophy on assistant coaches as I was always told they have no rights in the past. I kind of like it because I do think we tend to treat them like turds right off the bat and that may be unfair (some of the time).

As far as the OP, since the T was on the assistant, and as long as the coach was coaching during those 2 second standups, I would probably ignore it. Why stir the pot?

What does this mean exactly?

I will answer questions from asst's during timeouts and am cordial/professional to them. Hell, I use to be an asst coach.

But I am not going to listen to any chirping or sideline officiating from the bench. And I get the sense that this is the overwhelming feeling of my association as well.

[MD Longhorn]

"we should afford them some respect until they prove they don't deserve it."

As an aside, I once, long ago, had a mentor say something similar, but significantly different. Something like, "I respect assistant coaches tremendously, until they prove they exist."

Yeah - that's beyond my line... but it was funny.

[jTheUmp]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

"I respect assistant coaches tremendously, until they prove they exist."

Should not have read that while taking a sip of water.

Good one.

On topic: I'll answer any coaches (or player's, or even any bench personnel's) question, as long as it's asked a) at an appropriate time and b) politely and respectfully.

[Raymond]

During an extended dead ball I had assistant coach tell me last night that I needed to tell my partner about something the AC supposedly witnessed. I told him "i'm not going tell my partner what you saw". He then says "Well, what do want me to do, yell across the court at him". I said, "no, I want you to not say to anything at all to us".

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

What does this mean exactly?

I will answer questions from asst's during timeouts and am cordial/professional to them. Hell, I use to be an asst coach.

But I am not going to listen to any chirping or sideline officiating from the bench. And I get the sense that this is the overwhelming feeling of my association as well.

I should have been more clear. What you said is pretty much how we were told to treat them. It is not a "complain to the refs free" card, rather we don't automatically treat them like they're insignificant. I think the mindframe a lot of people are told is that assistant coaches have no rights whatsoever and people take that to an extreme - meaning they won't even entertain a legitimate question during a timeout. Hence that being the main gripe from head coaches.

As far as them being future head coaches, I did mention in the past how much pull head coaches have here in Texas. They can determine (as a district) which officials association will officiate their games. So that changes the perspective of the leadership of our associations - coaches have more power than they probably should here and it is part of the business of the association to give them a good product. How that is interpreted is subjective, but it is what it is.