Partner support
 

I spent some time observing a big youth tourney last week, and doing some mentoring/evaluating. One circumstance seems worthy of discussion here:
Late in a HSBV game, leading coach questions one of the officials on a no-call/possible dbl dribble, which the official admitted he didn't have a great look. But, his comment to the coach didn't satisfy the coach, who continued to follow him from his bench area to the front of the scorer's table. The official finally, and without being overly stern, gave him the stop sign, and said, "Coach, that's enough. We're going to play ball."
The coach turned, to go towards his bench, and then said to the other official, "Well, can I talk to you?" That official was well aware of his partner's conversation, but chose to engage the coach for several sentences, regarding the same play.
It was obviously a "divide and conquer" attitude by the coach.
I talked to both officials after the game and told them that in that situation, the stop sign should be taken as coming from the crew, and the second official might better have avoided that conversation.
Thoughts?

Movin' On ...
 

"No, not about that play coach. We're moving on". And then move away from the coach, quickly, even if it temporarily takes you out of position.

I am not a fan of the stop sign. I would have said, no and kept it moving.

Peace

Talk To The Hand ...
 

I'm not its biggest fan either, but sometimes, maybe not in this specific case, it's necessary. Plus, it's a visual clue to your partner (or partners outside of The Land Of Steady Habits) that this coach has been "warned", and it does show up on video of the game in case there's some type of question, or repercussion, at a later time.

I will often go a whole season without using it, but when I do, it's pretty effective.

I do not think it is necessarily. I think it is for show mostly. The only reason I have used it is because particular assignors like to see it on tape. But I cannot think of many situations I used it is actually stopped anything. All it has done is lead to a certain T. People are so worried about showing up the coach (not sure why) and we advocate this silly application. And depending on your "features" not everything is scene the same. Just look at how things are seen as to who walks in a neighborhood at night. So I do not advocate that for everyone.

And specifically in this situation why do you need to give the stop sign? Just walk away and ignore. You know what the coach is doing, at least those that have been doing this awhile. Just do not give him a forum to speak, he will get the message.

Peace

Stop, In The Name Of Love (The Supremes, 1965) ...
 

JRutledge: You make a lot of good points, however (Note: I've moved away from the original post, into a more general area):

Ignoring, and walking away, especially in a packed, loud, gymnasium, in a game with a hectic pace, doesn't give your partner any clue that this coach "has just about passed that line in the sand, he's been warned, and if he mouths off again he's going to be joining our tea party." Without this visual clue to your partner, he may give this coach a little leeway that you never intended him to get (To yourself: "What? Why is he even talking to that bastard? That son of a bitch already got his final warning. C'mon partner, bang him." When you're forty feet away). Without the visual clue, you may have to wait for a timeout, intermission, etc., for you to get together with your partner to let him know that you've had enough and that you want the coach sent to his seat on the bench, or maybe even to the locker room, at his next indiscretion.

On the other hand, if you think that the coach hasn't reached that line in the sand, and that, maybe, he deserves another shot at you, or your partner, then ignoring, and walking away, is a great way to handle the situation. Most coaches will eventually mouth of again and then either you, or your partner, can take care of business without the need of any stop sign. It may be different in Rob1968's neck of the woods, but around here, we don't have to give any "official" warning to a coach before ringing him up.

But, on the other hand (Have I run out of hands yet?), most coaches hate being ignored, and in a some cases, ignoring may actually escalate the situation.

Regarding the video evidence. In thirty-two years of officiating I've never had anybody, athletic director, principal, evaluator, assignment commissioner, etc., questioning any of my infrequent technical fouls. I really don't need a video of a stop sign to back me up later on. But, of course, there's always a first time.

And remember, I'm not a big fan:

Bottom line. In the wise words of Sylvester Stewart, better known as Sly Stone, "Different strokes by different folks". Man, if I didn't have Rich looking over my shoulder, this would have been a great place to post a video, for either the Sly and the Family Stone reference, or to the Supremes reference in the title of my post. Maybe he's out watching fireworks, and he won't notice. Should I chance it?

Based on what I am reading, we are assuming a lot of things. We are assuming the partner clearly saw the first confrontation. We are assuming that the partner even knows what the coach is complaining about. And if all the coach said to the partner is, "Can I talk to you?" I would either say "no," or "later" or even "I am not discussing his play coach" or ignore if I was away of a previous interaction where my partner had enough. If the coach is not yelling at the top of their lungs and just being a jerk, I tend to ignore those coaches. All I am going to do is screw it up by responding in most situations. He is not going to like my answer and it will do nothing more than make the situation much worse as I do not placate coaches with BS. I tell them what I know and move on.

And the dynamic of this issue that I am talking about as I have done this 18 years, but I am a playoff official and in many cases well known in some circles and not known well in others. What that means is I can go into places and certain coaches know my background as a higher level official, because they have either seen me in tournaments they play in or in the post season which gives you more cache to have your words believed or respected. A lot of this is who you are and where you are. And because our games are assigned by assignors of conferences and tournaments, we often have to deal with their positions on how to handle things. And that also means that depending on whom the official is the coach has a complaint about, sometimes the assignors well make it clear they are not dealing with a newer guy or one of their more respected officials. And you say you have never had anyone question your Ts, well I have or have been asked to why a certain situation was T'd or why a certain situation was handled after the fact. It has never got me in trouble, but yes the circumstances have been up for debate or further review. It does not happen often, but it happen this past season and I did not even give a T, but was involved in the handling the situation afterwards and the coach seemed more upset with me then the guy that gave him the T. And I did what I had done 100 times previously when I was the non-T'ing official, but someone it did not go over well.

This is why I do not like the attitude that the "stop sign" gives the same message for all. I have been in many situations where I have made my point and no one knew I got in the coach's behind about their behavior and drew a clear line. My partner's knew and the coach knew. And usually we are not surprised as a crew who the azzhole coaches are or what they have done to other officials in previous games. It is not uncommon we as a crew have a plan before the game starts if that coach gets out of hand and how we will deal with them.

And that is why I said it matters what attributes you have like what race, gender, height, experience, athletic attributes you might be, just to name a few might things that could help you or hurt you if you are dealing with a coach that does not respect one of those attributes you might have. I worked with a couple of female officials just this summer and it did not matter what call my partner made, the male coaches were not having it. And those coaches did not come out and openly say, "I do not think she can officiate because she is a woman."

For me it does not work, so if ignoring a coach upsets them when I was not involved in a play, that is their issue, not mine.

Peace

The stop sign here is non-verbal communication and if I'm the other official it should be a big hint.

Regardless of how big and/or loud the gym is if this is a two-person game and Official A is able to speak in a normal voice to Coach A, he/she is more than likely table side. That means I, as Official B, am not so I won't know exactly what they discussed. If I see the hand go up, however, I know whatever discussion they've had is done AND the coach needs to shut it down so I consider that a big help. If he/she tries to speak to me immediately after that -assuming they're not losing they're mind - I think the "we're not discussing that play, coach" answer is great.

Why is either official discussing a non-called, possible violation with a coach?
There was no whistle, there certainly won't be one now, and one isn't coming.
This isn't a legitimate reason to have a discussion with a coach. Save that for a question about a rule, a weird situation, a possible correctable error situation, or when one of his players gets T'd.

Seriously, some of the things over which people have interaction with coaches is so trivial and so unnecessary. Why are they doing it at all?

Does anyone else
 

give a bench warning in high school?

I find that although it's no where in the rule book, it sends a pretty clear statement that we as a crew are done with the coach.

I don't do it for three reasons.

First, it's not supported by rule.

Second, it means nothing more than just a simple verbal warning. I just make sure I inform my partners that I've warned the coach so we don't give him multiple warnings.

Third, it perpetuates the idea that they are some how owed a warning before any technical foul is issued.

Inform Partner ...
 

The second part of your statement (above) is important. Informing your partner could be either verbally (timeout, intermission, etc., my preferred method), or visually (stop sign). Sometimes things go so quickly in a game that one might not have time to verbally inform one's partner, thus the option (not by rule) of the stop sign. On the other hand, a partner, distracted while talking to a player, might not see a stop sign.

Good point. One that I don't believe that I've ever seen expressed here on the Forum. Great point.

I am a huge fan of the stop sign at the high school and college level (I work women's basketball) and the stop sign and a verbal warning are usually required. As well as actually putting the warning in the book at your first opportunity. I think it gives the coach a chance (if they want to) to cool down with a warning as we are trying to defuse the situation without using a technical foul. I have also had coaches tell me thank you for not whacking me and just giving me a warning on that play...I lost my head for a moment. Some coaches are going to run right through the stop sign and get whacked...but at least I tried to bring them back down. Also, you must always notified your partners at the first opportunity that the coach has been warned.

Final Countdown ...
 

I hope that we all agree on that, no matter what type (oral, or visual) of "warning" is given.

Your post illustrates that the coaches run the system in the leagues which you work. That's too bad. Poor behavior doesn't deserve a warning. It deserves to be penalized. A coach shouldn't be thanking an official for not getting T'd. A coach should be behaving in a manner that doesn't warrant one in the first place.
Sorry to say, but the inmates run the asylum where you are and you have sold out by taking the money and dealing with their garbage.
I guess that some people are happy doing that and others aren't.

There are cases that we can go straight to a technical foul...but if a warning can be given ahead of a technical that would be ideal. This is actually the way it is done and wanted to be done through out NCAAW basketball. It seems to work pretty well. So I am a sell out because I give a coach a warning...how did you make that leap of faith?

Although, I Guess, Anything Is Possible
 

I find it very difficult to believe that you've never warned a coach about any type of poor behavior. You call a foul on his player and after you report the foul the coach states to you, "He traveled before he got hit. You missed it", and you hit him with a technical foul right away for questioning your call? There's a spectrum of choices that we can use to control a coach, and his bench, from simply ignoring, all the way up to, and including, an ejection. A simple warning is one of those many choices.

That comment wouldn't require a T nor would I warn for it.

Yep.

Peace

Exactly. I'm not even responding to it 99% of the time. The other 1%, I regret my response.

Allow me to be clear, I cannot think of any situation involving poor or unsporting behavior in which I believe that a technical foul is deserved that I would instead merely issue a warning and fail to penalize the offender, whether he be a coach or a player.
If the current NCAAW rules are moving towards requiring a warning for a behavioral offense, not simply straying from the coaching box, prior to permitting a technical foul being issued, then I believe that that is going the wrong direction and allowing the mostly coaches and ADs who sit on the rules committee to inappropriately shift the balance in favor of preventing penalties for themselves.
Furthermore, I do believe that any official who would bend to those wishes (out of a desire to take the D1 paycheck) is a sell-out. Officials should be strong and insist upon proper respect when working a contest. Having a system in place which permits behavior counter to that without penalty is unacceptable working conditions for any official with an ounce of self-respect.
That's my position on this matter.

I respect your opinion...I just 100% disagree with you...and that is what makes the world a beautiful place.

I don't think they are saying that.

Instead, I think they are saying "look for an opportunity to warn about the less egregious behavior (in an attempt) to prevent the more egregious behavior."

An analogy I've been working on:

If you creep out onto a frozen lake, and you hear the ice crack, you can scurry back to shore. If you go out again, the ice is already weakened and you'll fall through. Or, if you go charging out to the middle, you won't hear the warning of the cracking ice and you'll fall through.

Nevada is an expert on everybody else's character. He also thinks his opinion should be the basis of what should or shouldn't be accepted. He thinks if he were an NCAA supervisor that he wouldn't have keep his coaches and ADs happy.

Really? What if a player has had an ongoing dialog with someone on the other team. It is a tight game in crunch time...that player gets fouled fairly hard but clean (doesn't merit intentional). Standing right next to you he says so softly that you barely understand it about the other player "F'ing jerk". Are you going to whack him or just say something along the lines of "I know you're frustrated but I heard that. If someone else in the gym hears you say something like that you will leave me no option."

I have chosen the later before and the player in question settled down, composed himself and we finished with no further language or incident. Until now, he and I were the only two that knew about the exchange. I did point out to my partner that those two were heating up again and we needed to watch them.

You had a player use the f-word about an opposing player in a high school game and you didn't penalize him? I'd say that was the wrong choice.
You should read the NFHS mission statement in the front of the rules book. Don't forget what we are trying to teach in this country through high school sports.

If you mean that I believe that people should in general act with professionalism, civility, respect, and integrity, then yes, that should be the gauge of what is acceptable and what is not.

The goals of HS and NCAA athletics have diverged over the past couple of decades. HS sports are an extension of the classroom and a teaching environment for young people who need to develop character as they grow into future leaders of our society. NCAA sports have become increasingly about money and generating revenue for the institutions which field the teams. With big money TV contracts and large coach salaries, the environment and focus are different. Almost no one is feeding his family by coaching HS, but people certainly do make a living, and often a very good one, coaching at the college level.

Therefore, the role of the officiating supervisor is different. At the HS level there is no need for the coaches or the ADs to have any say in the officiating process. All that the officials owe them is an honest effort (hustle), fairness in treating both teams equally, and looking out for the safety of all contestants. Allowing the coaches and ADs any other influence would negatively impact the integrity of the game.

At the college level, the supervisor must balance protecting the integrity of the game with the desire of the coaches and ADs to generate revenue. The games have become a spectator product for the paying customer. If the official is going to accept such a position and be compensated accordingly for it, then he need be ready to also accept the other factors which accompany that.

Just to clarify: Is A1 making the comment at B1 or about B1?

Why does that matter?

I'm with Nevada on this issue: "f-ing jerk" gets an easy T. If it's "about" the other player, it's a T. If it's "at" the other player, it's possibly flagrant.

I won't lose sleep either way.

And in most cases, that dialogue should have been nipped early for just this reason.

Just curious because some might argue if it's said about the player while the person who made the comment is facing away from the opponent and only an official can hear that they could talk the player down. I'm not part of "some" but again, I was curious.

Now...if you fall into the "talk them down" camp, this is way the heck too much dialogue to have with the kid.

JetMetFan...that isn't what I said. It was a long time ago but I think I just said "Watch it, controll yourself." I was lead and he was facing the wall. Being right next to him I barely heard it.

The dialog I mentioned wasn't constant the entire game and they always were looking at teammates. You know the type of stuff...one would make a shot over the other and say something like "All day long" as they ran to the other end. One blocked the others shot and when he teammates came up to him he said "Not today". Stuff like that...they never looked at each other when they were talking but you knew it was directed at the other. Like a pro coach sending a message to his players through the media at a press conference...not said directly to them but the message was sent.

The player in question's team was seeing their lead shrink rather quickly and I thought it was mostly frustration. Now if someone else would have heard it or he had been facing the player...whole different story and significantly different result.

Just to add...

I viewed this a lot like an incident that happened the week before. An official I knew was calling a game at a school where the head coach rarely said ANYTHING to officials. That night, right from the start he was carping about everything and almost stomping around in the bench area. A player for the other team slipped and banged his head on the floor and while his coaches tended to him this official asked the coach if there was a problem because he was acting so out of character. The coach told him he had received a call that his father passed away earlier that afternoon, then added "Dad would have wanted me to coach tonight." He told the coach they would work with him, but he needed to try to control his emotions as best he could. They managed to get through the game without having to stick him.

I admire the way you'all handle these "un-anticipated" and problematic issues on the fly. As refs you are tasked with making split second decisions that must be correct 99.5% of the time--in the heat of the moment of competition and against the backdrop of heckling rawdy fans, frustrated players, and all manner of distractions. Small wonder

Travelin Man:
Has anyone welcomed you to the forum?
If not, let me be the first. I am sure you will find it to be a worthhwhile learning experience:D

Thanks for the very kind welcome kind sir!
And, thanks for the thoughtfulness you [and your colleagues] have exhibited toward my questions on the posts.
I sincerely hope that you prosper in your officiating career.
Admittedly, I am sometimes a teensy bit "intimidated" by coaches who act like they can boss me around and make odd faces when I call violations on their players--hence my screen name "you're travelling man" is what I once told a player in earshot of their coach during a JV game this past Spring--when the player was unexpectedly trapped by defender from the blind side. The coach looked askance at me and tried to belittle the credibility of my call---I just look back at him and keep officiating. It feels great to have the insight and support of you all.

You'll get over this with experience.

Just apply your years of "Mom" experience in dealing with recalcitrant toddlers and their tantrums. That is the proper perspective..Just picture them as whiny 2yr olds who missed their nap.:cool:

*ohh lol! Now that was the best advice I 've recieved since on this msg board. I'll burp the coach, give him his binky, and tech him off to sleep next time.

That's cool. As for the way they were saying it, i.e. indirectly, at some point telling them to knock it off would be appropriate.

I don't suppose anyone would say to the coach "Coach, properly expressed that would be MAY I talk to you?". Didn't think so. But then again, I'm from the Northeast and we all know what that means.

I use the stop sign all the time. Every time I use it, the coach - an adult - immediately stops what they are doing. It is amazing how putting a hand up in someone's face makes them stop their behavior immediately. I use it with my wife too...boy does she understand that when I "give her the hand" I have had enough.

Ridiculous!

I was raised hearing, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Well, I don't want another adult giving me a stop sign so I'm not going to do it to another adult.

I'm with you. I may give one a year and it's never quite what I wanted to do in the first place, but there I am with my hand up. By that point, I may as well have just whacked the person involved.

I work college baseball and they specifically want us to tell coaches that "this is your warning." Of course, the only penalty that follows that is ejection...

I believe they are methods of displaying the stop sign without sticking your hand in the direction of someone's face. I use a double-handed stop sign when I see a coach beginning to react to a partner's call. It always from at least 10 feet away and below my chest level.

I'll use a one-handed stop sign off to the side when I'm walking away from a contentious discussion and it's accompanied with the phrase "that's enough" or "we're done here".

Yeah but your 6'9"
 

BNR -

As tall as you are when you put your hands by your side they are in most people's faces.....unless you are scared of an assistant in Albright and your partner has to care of business .......:D:D:D:D

I was just a body guard in that situation. Only time I noticed that dude is the 2 times you T'd him and when I directed him to the exit. I don't think he liked your cologne or something. :cool:

I do not think he literally is referring to sticking your hand in someone's face directly. I think he believes the action in many ways is disrespectful as I feel kind of the same. And in my experience it has not usually prevented a T, it helps exacerbate one to be called. Now as said by MSR, you are taller than most of us and not many people are going to do much to you for all kinds of reasons other than your height. I am taller than most men, but not necessarily taller than most basketball coaches. I can imagine that you could damn near look at someone and get the point across that many feel the stop sign accomplishes.

Peace

No Penalty Box ???
 

What? No technical fouls? No yellow cards? You guys are barbarians.

I know what you mean and I don't really do that either...but that is a much better way to do things. I use a Patrick Swayze approach - be nice until it is time not to be nice - more than I used to. I prefer to address the behavior first and the coach's concerns second. Of course, there is a time when ignoring is the best solution because coaches are often irrational/emotional.

A lot of this is just being human and communicating. There are times when a person needs their space even though they want to argue. Those are the times it is best to leave well enough alone. However, when during the course of off court interactions would we put a hand up and tell someone that is enough. Naturally, their thought is probably something along the lines of, "You don't put your hand up and tell me that is enough". At that point, things go left fast.

Who Leads ???
 

By dirty dancing with the coach?