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

[Bad Zebra]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

This was addressed by the NCAA in some detail this year. This is the instruction women's officials were given. (I thought this was excellent advice and should be mirrored by the NFHS.)

Bench Decorum
Guidelines (to be added to the Appendix in the Rules Book):
Unsportsmanlike Conduct. Coaches and bench personnel are expected to adhere to the specific rules set forth in Rule 10-4. Repeated or prolonged violations of these rules should result in a technical foul being assessed against the coach or other bench personnel. More egregious conduct violations, while inside or outside the coaching box, should be properly and consistently penalized with a technical foul without warning.

Examples of egregious conduct violations include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Comments directed at or referring to any game official that question the integrity of an official (i.e., repeated references to the number of fouls called against each team; suggesting an official is “cheating” a team, etc.).
2. Profane, vulgar, threatening, or derogatory remark s or personal comments relating to race, ethnicity, religion, gender, or sexual orientation directed at or referring to any game official or opposing player/bench personnel.
3. Prolonged, negative responses to a call/no-call which is disrespectful or un-professional and includes, but is not limited to: thrashing the arms in disgust, dramatizing contact by re-enacting the play, or running or jumping in disbelief over a call/non-call.
4. A negative response to a call/no-call including, but not limited to, approaching/charging an official in a hostile, aggressive or otherwise threatening manner, emphatically removing one's coat in response to a call/no-call or throwing equipment or clothing on to the floor.
5. Continual criticism during a game regarding the same incident after warning by an official. Officials should permit certain behavior by the head coach who engages in spontaneous reactions to officiating calls and non-calls provided the coach remains in the coaching box and the reaction is not prolonged, profane, vulgar, or threatening. At the official’s discretion, recurring spontaneous reactions by the head coach may result in a warning with subsequent incidents resulting in a technical foul. When complaints become more public or the attacks personal to the official, there should be less discretion exercised by the official.

That is a great list. Well thought out and specific...and that's why you won't see anything like it coming from the Fed. They prefer to keep the concept abstract and nebulous...thus forcing the onus down to the local official to define unsportsmanlike behavior...if it doesn't have to do with tobacco, taunting, or profanity...we're pretty much on our own to define it.

[Adam]

I like it well enough I'm going to incorporate it into my high school game.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

if it doesn't have to do with tobacco, taunting, or profanity...we're pretty much on our own to define it.

Nevermind that they also don't define "profanity" and everyone's line there differs as well.