Illegal Screen/Technical video--your thoughts?

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I guess I have been told recently that the "wave" is so over the top that it must get a T no matter when they give one. I never used that standard but have given Ts for other things. I have been criticized for giving Ts for actual language and other behavior and suggestion of integrity, but somehow the "wave" must be penalized at all times. And yes if the coach did more I have no problem with the T anyway. The officials were there and they know what was said and done in this situation and done previously. I have a hard time trying to judge someone for what they give a T for without hearing their side of the story. This might have been the 5th time the coach did something and then was warned. I just am not a fan if the "wave" was the first time a coach reacted, but some feel that is over the top.

Peace

I hear ya. For me a simple wave off is not automatic either. I consider all of the other factors you mentioned.

Just from the video though I think the coach is way too demonstrative in his protest of the call. And that's without even hearing what was said in additon to the gestures.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

I hear ya. For me a simple wave off is not automatic either. I consider all of the other factors you mentioned.

Just from the video though I think the coach is way too demonstrative in his protest of the call. And that's without even hearing what was said in additon to the gestures.

To some his behavior was too demonstrative, but then again I would like to know what other actions were tolerated. These issues are often not confined to a bubble and if other actions were allowed similarity, I would probably suggest this could have been passed on. Then again, the officials were there and all we are seeing is a muted version of the play.

Peace

[Adam]

Would love to see the C get this screen, but I don't think it's a horrible call for T. i personally would have liked to see the T or C get the technical, though. If T isn't going to take care of it (the coach is yelling at him), the C should do it since he's practically in the coaching box. The L is the last resort, which might be why it's so delayed after the foot stomp.

I love the coach's "what was that for" look after he realizes he's earned a seat belt.

[JetMetFan]

C looked like he was just going to ignore the whole thing with the coach. Maybe he'd heard so much from the guy during the game he just tuned him out? Not a great reason to miss a foot stomp but it happens.

[Pantherdreams]

As others have mentioned out of the context of the rest of the game its hard to judge where both the screen and the coaches actions fall. I also don't have sound (I assume that trus for everyone?) so I'm just seeing the coaches actions.

Screen: From this far away its hard to pick up anything that would have me calling that illegal. If that is an illegal screen in my neck of the woods no screens are being set in games that aren't fouls.

Coach: The jumping and stomping alone is not enough for a T. Coaches can be a demonstrative as they want, but I assume its targeted at the officials and things are being said that call their judgement into question in which case he's probablly asking for it.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

As others have mentioned out of the context of the rest of the game its hard to judge where both the screen and the coaches actions fall. I also don't have sound (I assume that trus for everyone?) so I'm just seeing the coaches actions.

Screen: From this far away its hard to pick up anything that would have me calling that illegal. If that is an illegal screen in my neck of the woods no screens are being set in games that aren't fouls.

Coach: The jumping and stomping alone is not enough for a T. Coaches can be a demonstrative as they want, but I assume its targeted at the officials and things are being said that call their judgement into question in which case he's probablly asking for it.

I agree on the screen.

I disagree that they can be as demonstrative as they want. His foot stomp is obviously not directed at his players here, so even if nothing was said, I'd be likely to call a T.

If this is the first thing he's done or said to us all game and there's no words to go with the stomp; I might ignore it. However, he doesn't get to act like a five year old mad at his sister without risking a technical foul.

Probably his first T all year, too.

[Bad Zebra]

It was interesting analyzing this one without sound...especially the coaching issue. The body language and mechanics tell quite a story even without sound.

As far as the screen...I agree with those that called it marginal. I probably would have laid off. By the letter of the rule...probably a foul. A big boy varsity playoff game? I'd be inclined to "play on".

Regarding the T, it almost looks to me like the official that called it was looking for an opportunity to do so. He was the furthest away from the action and came flying across the court (emphatically) to grab it. If I had to bet, I'd say the coach had been warned or had been acting afoool for the entire game and he (calling official) had enough...foot stomp....wave...WHACK!

[rockyroad]

I still contend that if the C had turned and addressed the coaches behavior as soon as the foot stomp and first yelling, then we never get to the big wave-off and continued yelling. It sure appears that the C did not want to get involved, and the L had to TCB. Just looks ugly.

And I agree with Adam - no way does a coach get to be as demonstrative as they want to be. There are obviously times when a little more leeway might be given, but this guy went too far.

[zebraman]

No problem with the screen call. It wasn't huge, but there were a couple of teammates trying to set bad screens prior to that and they missed. That call will help clean it up.

As far as the T goes, that's pretty easy. You let that go and you lose control of the benches. Based on some posts made to me a couple days ago, the coach needs to learn to wait until the play goes to the other end of the floor and then act like a jackass. He wont' get T'd up if he does that when we are not on his end.

[JRutledge]

Yeah Z, you need to put "" on the end of that one for sure.

Peace

[SperlingPE]

good call on the illegal screen - would have like some help from the C on that, but the L saw it coming

good call for the T
again the C could have helped here.

the three officials kind of together at the bench (were they all looking the same way once?)

the C going over to make the explanation - excellent

[bob jenkins]

The T is definitely a "when in Rome" thing (based only on the short clip). In mnay areas you would be expected to ignore or adress in other ways before going to the T. If you issues the T this quickly and from this far away, you'd be viewed in a negative light.

I fully understand those who would call it based on the expectations and norms in their area.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

If you issues the T this quickly and from this far away, you'd be viewed in a negative light.

Is this pretty much everywhere? Why is this? Should a technical always be left up to the closest official?

[zebraman]

Originally Posted by seanwestref

Is this pretty much everywhere? Why is this? Should a technical always be left up to the closest official?

Not in my area. Doesn't matter how far you are away when a T is deserved. In fact, a "partner protect" technical is preferred to the appearance of a personal confrontation between calling official and pissed-off coach. Around here, we emphasize that the official(s) facing the table always be scanning the benches to maintain bench control. Obviously, officials facing the benches are further away.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by seanwestref

Is this pretty much everywhere? Why is this? Should a technical always be left up to the closest official?

Sometimes the closest official is dealing with the situation and then you come in from far away and do what they should have been given a chance to do. Not to say that this specific situation applies, but you better be sure it is accepted by the people that hire you and your partner. That is why at least I would like to know the exchange before making a real judgment to the situation.

Peace