Trouble Bruin in the Pac-12 - & it Ain't UCLA!

[JRutledge]

Well unless he gave the official in question the money or the trip, I really do not see the big deal.

And based on what I saw, Miller went nuts and got popped. That is a normal every day of the week call that I have seen a lot this year and he was worse than the other incidents.

Peace

[twocentsworth]

JRut, we all know officials who say "i owe him one" or "i've got one in my pocket for him next time I see him" or something to that effect. We don't always know if they are serious or not.

It's one thing for a single official to say that/think that. It's SOMETHING ENTIRELY DIFFERENT when the Supervisor of Officials makes specific comments about a specific coach and then, serious or not, ties a financial "reward" to that statement. Of course we can't know for sure if he was serious or not.

BUT THEN IT RISES TO ANOTHER LEVEL when the coach in question is "wacked" at a critical juncture of the game by an official who was in the meeting and doesn't give very many T's (per statsheet.com, he worked 11 games this year in which a T was issued (which puts him outside the TOP 100 officials in T's given this year) - it doesn't track which official called a T).

I would think a Supervisor of Officials would have a hard time surviving an incident like this with his job secure.

[Berkut]

Yeah, it matters not whether he was joking or serious. Does every official who heard him (and his hoping tog et mroe games from him in the future) know he was joking?

Was this one of those "HAha, I am totally joking. Exept not really" kind of jokes?

I am kind of amazed a supervisor would say something like this, if for no other reason than if the coach in question does then get a T, it calls the legitimacy into question.

And of course the T in question was very...odd. And led to Miller going off in a press conference (which he has never done). And then the head of the Pac-12 fined Scott $25k as a result, which has never been done.

All this, and then we find out that before the game the supervisor of officials "jokingly" told his officials to get Miller?

Yikes, that is definitely not good.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by twocentsworth

JRut, we all know officials who say "i owe him one" or "i've got one in my pocket for him next time I see him" or something to that effect. We don't always know if they are serious or not.

It's one thing for a single official to say that/think that. It's SOMETHING ENTIRELY DIFFERENT when the Supervisor of Officials makes specific comments about a specific coach and then, serious or not, ties a financial "reward" to that statement. Of course we can't know for sure if he was serious or not.

BUT THEN IT RISES TO ANOTHER LEVEL when the coach in question is "wacked" at a critical juncture of the game by an official who was in the meeting and doesn't give very many T's (per statsheet.com, he worked 11 games this year in which a T was issued (which puts him outside the TOP 100 officials in T's given this year) - it doesn't track which official called a T).

I would think a Supervisor of Officials would have a hard time surviving an incident like this with his job secure.

I am not defending the comment and without the comment there would be hardly a question of the T at all other than on fanboy sites. I can see a supervisor saying that "We need to address the conduct of (fill in the blank) coach." I can see that taking place even in a crowded room. But when you ask to pay off someone if they do something, then you lose credibility when that comment gets out. And I am not going to take Miller's take on what he said or did not say. Now maybe the supervisor put the conduct of Miller in the head of the officials, but that does not mean he was not warranted to be penalized. Miller plays the "I did not curse" game that coaches play as if that is the reason they get T'd up.

I T'd up an assistant coach this past season and the head coach told the tournament director that the person I T'd up was, "A disciple of Christ" as a suggestion how nice this guy was and that basically he did nothing wrong (Yes that is what he told him). When I told other officials what happened to them it was a no-brainer T to them. And this was a Catholic school and conference where the F-word is used as an adjative in normal conversation on any given Friday night. And Miller's reaction was no different than other coaches and I doubt he was a choir boy and said nothing at all.

I am sure there were multiple reports over the year of Miller's behavior and no one was addressing his behavior and in a colorful way this was addressed by the Rush. Heck you are from this state and after the 1A-2A weekend, the adminstrator told a bigger room of coaches, players and officials during the 3A-4A State Finals, "For those that feel they need a warning before given a technical foul, consider this your warning." And all of that was in relation to what happen in the 2A game and how the state felt the officials did not take care of business appropriately in their opinion. I think Rush should have said something like this rather than offering a payout with his comments.

Peace

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

But when you ask to pay off someone if they do something, then you lose credibility when that comment gets out.

There it is. What confuses me is how someone gets to such a lead role without knowing this. Especially in this day and age when everything is taken too seriously (sadly, IMO), don't people know there are some things you can't joke about?

And this is coming from an Arizona detractor. Not sure how old Berkut is, but I'm still holding a grudge from the '86 CWS. (Maine had a 7-0 lead on Arizona in the series opener, but lost 8-7 on a walk-off homer in the bottom of the ninth, 3-2 count. Arizona won the national championship. Maine hasn't been to the CWS since.)

[Adam]

Everyone in the room knew he was joking.

One guy realized his mommy can't help him get better games, so he went to a reporter (or league official) instead.

Was the joke in poor taste and ill-advised? Sure. But it was a joke.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Adam

Everyone in the room knew he was joking.

One guy realized his mommy can't help him get better games, so he went to a reporter (or league official) instead.

Was the joke in poor taste and ill-advised? Sure. But it was a joke.

I agree.

Peace

[The_Rookie]

Alot has been written on this topic and great thoughts and emotions have been displayed. With 190 posts thought my turn to add something

I know a few of the PAC 12 officials personally and I can tell you that some feel that there has been a break in ranks so to speak leading to a divided group. They are trying to figure out who among their peers they can trust anymore and have to walk on pins and needles about what they say in the locker room.

At any level there are have and have nots and officials who are filled with anger and resentment beacuse they don't get the big games or state playoffs. We at times eat are own and I feel that officiating can be a rough and "dirty" business not because of the coaches or ADs but the way we officials treat one another...The Ed Rush incidents demonstrates this at a high profile level within PAC 12

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Adam

Everyone in the room knew he was joking.

One guy realized his mommy can't help him get better games, so he went to a reporter (or league official) instead.

Was the joke in poor taste and ill-advised? Sure. But it was a joke.

I agree also but Rush worked in a larger spotlight than this so he has to be smarter. I've heard tons of stories fom older officials about assignors putting them on certain certain games to "send a message" to a coach who'd been a PITA but that was 25-30 years ago. There are way too many media outlets for people to snitch/squeal/vent. Even if the anonymous official didn't like the schedule he received from Rush that doesn't diminish what was said if it's true.

Remember the quote: “The appearance of impropriety is every bit as bad as the impropriety itself.”

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

I agree also but Rush worked in a larger spotlight than this so he has to be smarter. I've heard tons of stories fom older officials about assignors putting them on certain certain games to "send a message" to a coach who'd been a PITA but that was 25-30 years ago. There are way too many media outlets for people to snitch/squeal/vent. Even if the anonymous official didn't like the schedule he received from Rush that doesn't diminish what was said if it's true.

Remember the quote: “The appearance of impropriety is every bit as bad as the impropriety itself.”

I agree he should have been smarter than that, but it was still a joke. It'll probably cost him his job, but it shouldn't.

And I disagree with your quote. Actual impropriety is worse. It's not even close, IMO

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by Adam

Everyone in the room knew he was joking.

One guy realized his mommy can't help him get better games, so he went to a reporter (or league official) instead.

Was the joke in poor taste and ill-advised? Sure. But it was a joke.

He said it twice, on consecutive days, and the very day he said it the second time, Miller gets T'ed up for reportedly saying "He touched the ball" when in fact, the UCLA player did in fact touch the ball.

I think Rush was joking about paying anyone for giving Miller a T, but it seems pretty clear he was NOT joking about making sure Miller got a T if any situation came up where it could be even remotely justified. The message was sent, and heard.

So yeah, "he was joking" in that he was not really going to pay anyone off. But he was not joking that he wanted Miller T'ed or run, I suspect. And I suspect his officials didn't find it a joke either.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Berkut

He said it twice, on consecutive days, and the very day he said it the second time, Miller gets T'ed up for reportedly saying "He touched the ball" when in fact, the UCLA player did in fact touch the ball.

I think Rush was joking about paying anyone for giving Miller a T, but it seems pretty clear he was NOT joking about making sure Miller got a T if any situation came up where it could be even remotely justified. The message was sent, and heard.

So yeah, "he was joking" in that he was not really going to pay anyone off. But he was not joking that he wanted Miller T'ed or run, I suspect. And I suspect his officials didn't find it a joke either.

I wasn't in the room, but I suspect you're right, and I don't have a problem with it either. If the coach has been a dick, then I see no problem with a supervisor reminding the staff to take care of it.

[JRutledge]

It obviously was a joke, but a joke that mostly officials would understand. How often do we joke or brag about giving a coach a T and we either never give the T or we joke about how it was we gave the T in the first place. I think where he made the mistake was that he felt no one would go to the press. Well everything in on video, tape and what you say in private company will be mentioned in public (or has the potential).

Peace

[twocentsworth]

Originally Posted by Adam

Everyone in the room knew he was joking.

One guy realized his mommy can't help him get better games, so he went to a reporter (or league official) instead.

Was the joke in poor taste and ill-advised? Sure. But it was a joke.

It was such a funny joke, that after "telling" it in the meeting on Thr., Rush "told the same joke" on Friday...hmmm.

Yea, sure...it was a joke.

Wonder if Rush will think it's a joke when the PAC-12 commish tells him he's fired.

[icallfouls]

The PAC 12 has conducted its investigation and Rush has not been fired....yet. Now the story has gone national (ESPN this morning).