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

[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

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Adam

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

Depends on the situation. This leans a little more towards the impropriety itself because Miller was rung up. If Arizona wins the game and/or Miller doesn't get a T then it stinks a little bit less but it still has an odor.

We as officials also operate on the "appearance of..." theory all the time. That's why, for example, at the NCAA level you tell assignors where you went to college. They don't want anyone thinking you might be compromised in any way. Rush trying to get his point across the way he did looks bad. We can tell he's joking but some non-officials may not be able to or want to and, unfortunately, those folks are our clients.

[ballgame99]

I don't watch any PAC12 ball, but if Miller was such a PIA, and such a problem, why was this his first tech of the year? What has he done to be targeted? Did he complain about officiating in the press or something?

In and of itself this is no big deal, but combined with the fact that he got T'd up in crunchtime for a relatively minor outburst, it just looks bad. Rush may have been joking that he would give someone $5,000, but the message was clear; someone please take care of that Miller guy.

[Adam]

1. I'd like to see video of the situation that got him the T before I cede the point that his outburst was minor.
2. It sounds very much like it was not the first time he should have been given one. Sometimes, ABS can accumulate over a few games. Should it? No, but it happens.
3. Even if it was minor, it could have been ABS from that game. I'd have to see that.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ballgame99

I don't watch any PAC12 ball, but if Miller was such a PIA, and such a problem, why was this his first tech of the year? What has he done to be targeted? Did he complain about officiating in the press or something?

Easy. There are coaches in conferences that act up and officials let is slide because they feel that giving a T would hurt them professionally because of who he is and the school he comes from. I did see Arizona games several times this year and Miller does rant a lot and probably after several situations officials were asked about his behavior. I bet this was just a long line of stuff where Rush felt officials were giving him a pass. Remember NBA guys were never afraid to T up a coach and even a player. I am not going to say Miller was worse than other coaches in that league, but I can understand why Rush would feel that the officials were not doing their job.

Peace

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am not going to say Miller was worse than other coaches in that league, but I can understand why Rush would feel that the officials were not doing their job.

Then he needs to learn how to communicate. First, the conference championship is not the time to suddenly get religion. Second, words matter.

I had a high school assignor tell me before a game a couple of years ago that if there were any problems we were to deal with it and he would back us completely. My take from what he said (this was at halftime of the the JV game, when I had just arrived for the varsity game) was that he had complaints that some officials were not taking care of business and he wanted to say it loud and clear that he had our back. There was nothing in his statement, tone or mannerism that anyone could take as anything against any coach or player.

This year, I heard of an assignor tell an AD that he had complaints about a coach from several officials. The AD said if the coach is such a problem, then how come he has not received one technical foul? When I shared this story with some officials who work that league, at least one said that was accurate: that he had not issued a T in one game where it was probably warranted. Now...there was never a conversation, memo or anything else to officials that said: this coach is a problem, deal with it. But if the assignor is hearing these reports (and maybe even observing the behavior himself), then he should be making clear to his officials of his expectations. If that is all Ed Rush was doing, that is correct. But timing, location, tone and words matter. From what I have read (and I will accept that it was supposed to be a "joke"), he still failed on virtually every one of those counts.

The memos I saw this season from the NCAA and from my college assignors about bench decorum and dealing with coaches were not echoed by any high school assignor. I know some officials say they are proud they have not called a T in many years; others almost brag about how many they call. If there is a level of expectation from our assignors, then I say they need to be able to tell us that.

[JRutledge]

So you are telling me you have never been with a group of officials and no one in that meeting ever made a comment about a coach or player or school?

I know I have been in that situation and never took those situations that seriously. And he could have communicated this better, but obviously someone went to the press (and did not want to be identified) by telling what happened in the room.

No one prior to this incident was claiming Arizona was targeted in any way or that there was some conspiracy about a T or the actions in that game. The press conference after the game in the Pac-12 Tournament was a typical coach complaining what happened in the game like you saw with the Baylor Coach. Miller tried to act like he did not curse so that was the reason he should not have gotten the T. And if no money or trips were included in the comments I seriously doubt we would know this even took place.

Peace

[twocentsworth]

Fellas - the facts are simple:

- Ed Rush, in a meeting on Thr. of the conference tournament, told game officials he would pay $5,000 or give them a trip to Cancun to anyone who "rang him up" or "ran him".
- Ed Rush said the same thing in a meeting the next day, Friday.
- On Friday, one official (who was present in BOTH meetings) assessed a T to the very same coach (AFTER an incorrect call went against Arizona).
- Per a PAC-12 official, the game official who assessed the T doesn't normally give people a T (in fact he worked only 11 games this yr w/ a T; which ranks him tied for 144th nationally).
- The ONLY T that Miller got during the year was in this game.

When you think about it, here's where it gets even more suspicious.

During conference tournaments, aren't players and coaches even more emotional than during the regular season? The officials that are selected to work these games not only get plays right, but more importantly, have the ability to manage players/coaches during incredibly tense situations.

During the BCS conference tournaments this year (PAC 12, Big 12, Big 10, SEC, ACC, & Big East), do you know how many times a coach was assessed a T?.....

TWICE: Arizona's Miller and UCLA's Howland (vs Oregon in the Champ. Game).

During the 68 total tournament games played, some of the most volatile and boisterous coaches in America weren't penalized...yet a guy who had not received 1 T all season gets one AFTER the Supervisor specifically targets him in a meeting - not once but TWICE?

You're right....it WAS a joke after all.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Depends on the situation. This leans a little more towards the impropriety itself because Miller was rung up. If Arizona wins the game and/or Miller doesn't get a T then it stinks a little bit less but it still has an odor.

We as officials also operate on the "appearance of..." theory all the time. That's why, for example, at the NCAA level you tell assignors where you went to college. They don't want anyone thinking you might be compromised in any way. Rush trying to get his point across the way he did looks bad. We can tell he's joking but some non-officials may not be able to or want to and, unfortunately, those folks are our clients.

I'm not saying the appearance can't have some of the same consequences as actual impropriety. But it is certainly not equally as bad.