Wofford/NC State–Gottfried technical foul (Video)

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

As it is being determined that it would be in the best interest for police officers to wear body cams for sake of recording incidents and transparency, I would like to see microphone/recorders inserted into the precision timing devices that the officials wear. Record everything.....

Gottfried says he didn't use profanity prior to the T, everyone here is assuming that he must have used some magic words. Who's ever going to really know what happened and what was said?
....

Wrong, not everybody here is assuming that:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Gottfried says "That's bullsh!t Karl, I was just talking to you" after he gets the T.

Well, what I see is a coach talking while demonstratively clapping his hands. That's not "just talking" in my book.

Where is it written T's are only for cursing?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

As it is being determined that it would be in the best interest for police officers to wear body cams for sake of recording incidents and transparency, I would like to see microphone/recorders inserted into the precision timing devices that the officials wear. Record everything.....

Gottfried says he didn't use profanity prior to the T, everyone here is assuming that he must have used some magic words. Who's ever going to really know what happened and what was said?

Having recordings that conference assignors and university administration can go back, listen to and review could allow them to target and clean-up whichever side of the aisle needs it.

1. The comparison is not valid. No one is going to jail over a technical foul.

2. These are not contradictory. One can use magic words without using profanity.

3. It's not our business what was said, I'm sure it's in Hess' report to Adams.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Adam

1. The comparison is not valid. No one is going to jail over a technical foul.

2. These are not contradictory. One can use magic words without using profanity.

3. It's not our business what was said, I'm sure it's in Hess' report to Adams.

I agree with everything, but I doubt he reports to Adams, he reports to the supervisor of the conference. And I am sure that the situation was addressed in a report like all games at that level likely require.

Peace

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I did not realize that profanity was the only reason to give a T for unsporting behavior.

Peace

That was your reasoning, not mine, in your first response to the OP.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

That was your reasoning, not mine, in your first response to the OP.

I actually said, "magic words" might have been used. That is not necessarily profanity. The coach could have said, "You........" and then followed it with other words.

Do not try to twist this discussion. There are a lot of reasons coaches get Ts and often it is not what they say, but what they do.

Peace

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by APG

And if he didn't use profanity...so what? His overt actions of slapping down on his hand like he did in displeasure for the call was enough in itself to get a T.

If there was no profanity, my opinion is that what was done did not warrant the technical. Instead, especially with the past history and being his first game back in 3 years, why not have a 5 second conversation with the coach, tell him that's enough, and give a warning. 4 minutes into the game, optically speaking and perceptually, just looks bad and looks like Hess flat out has something against someone or something.

Maybe it was deserved, but it is truly unfortunate he had to be the one on the sideline at that time.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

If there was no profanity, my opinion is that what was done did not warrant the technical. Instead, especially with the past history and being his first game back in 3 years, why not have a 5 second conversation with the coach, tell him that's enough, and give a warning. 4 minutes into the game, optically speaking and perceptually, just looks bad and looks like Hess flat out has something against someone or something.

Maybe it was deserved, but it is truly unfortunate he had to be the one on the sideline at that time.

And you would be fired from even some lower level leagues if you only needed profanity to give a T. For the record at college games, we hear profanity all the time and do not penalize based off of profanity.

Since you are so concerned about when Hess was last there (not like this is a basketball mecca), I am sure Hess' schedule will be just fine not going back in the next 10 years.

Peace

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by Adam

1. The comparison is not valid. No one is going to jail over a technical foul.

2. These are not contradictory. One can use magic words without using profanity.

3. It's not our business what was said, I'm sure it's in Hess' report to Adams.

1. The comparison is that there are conflicting sides of what happened. Video and/or audio can, in a lot of cases, determine which side is more truthful.

2. What is in Hess' report is Hess' version of what happened. And if Gottfrieds' report of what happened is totally opposite, then what?

I never said it was OUR business. I believe I said it would be something that could be used by conference assignors and school administration. Nobody should have anything to hide. Why would this be such a big deal?

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And you would be fired from even some lower level leagues if you only needed profanity to give a T. For the record at college games, we hear profanity all the time and do not penalize based off of profanity.

Since you are so concerned about when Hess was last there (not like this is a basketball mecca), I am sure Hess' schedule will be just fine not going back in the next 10 years.

Peace

Then I humbly request that every time I used the word profanity please replace it with 'magic words'.

That way maybe we can get past the 'small picture' and get back to the broader point(s) I was making.....

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

1. The comparison is that there are conflicting sides of what happened. Video and/or audio can, in a lot of cases, determine which side is more truthful.

2. What is in Hess' report is Hess' version of what happened. And if Gottfrieds' report of what happened is totally opposite, then what?

I never said it was OUR business. I believe I said it would be something that could be used by conference assignors and school administration. Nobody should have anything to hide. Why would this be such a big deal?

What can't be disputed is that Gottfried was demonstratedly clapping his hands together, an aspect you have failed to address.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

Then I humbly request that every time I used the word profanity please replace it with 'magic words'.

That way maybe we can get past the 'small picture' and get back to the broader point(s) I was making.....

You're the one who contradicted the "magic words" theory with the coach's denial that he used profanity.

Years ago, a man ran a red light and broadsided my wife's car. He challenged the ticket in court and kept insisting that he wasn't speeding.

The defense doesn't make sense in light of the charges. NCSU fans are deluding themselves if they think Hess even cares enough to be out to get them.

At that level, profanity is neither required nor sufficient for a technical foul.

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

Somebody point me back toward where in a book (I'd love an NCAA-W book(s) reference, but anything will do) to where the case plays for "the official shall wait until the layup is successful/unsuccessful to assess the technical foul, yadayada" is supported by a rule reference that contradicts:

"Art. 2. A live ball shall not become dead when a foul is committed by an opponent of a player who starts a try for goal before a foul occurs, provided that time does not expire before the ball is in flight."

Haven't thought about that in a couple of years, can't find things, and want to know where that lives, so that I can explain how the cited rule doesn't for some reason include the HC as an "opponent."

Closest thing in the current books is this, though it is a bit of a stretch...fairly sure there used to be a case that involved an unsporting T on the HC,

Rule: 9.3.3


9.3.3 SITUATION D:

The score is tied 60 to 60 with four seconds remaining in the game. A1 has a fast break and is near the free-throw line on his/her way to an uncontested lay-up. B5 running down the court near the sideline, intentionally runs out of bounds in the hopes of getting a leaving-the-floor violation called.

RULING: B5's intentional violation should be ignored and A1's activity should continue without interruption.

COMMENT: Non-contact, away from the ball, illegal defensive violations (i.e. excessively swinging the elbows, leaving the floor for an unauthorized reason) specifically designed to stop the clock near the end of a period or take away a clear advantageous position by the offense should be temporarily ignored. The defensive team should not benefit from the tactic. If time is not a factor, the defense should be penalized with the violation or a technical foul for unsporting behavior. (10-1-8)

[Pantherdreams]

I didn't "see" anything that I deemed T worthy on the tape. Particularly at an NCAA men's level where coaches often walk out onto the floor during dead balls and use profanity at their players and in the direction of officials all the time. To be fair after the first t he said "That's bull$#!&" and there was no reaction so the idea that he's being penalized for profanity is off base anyway. I'm also not considering emphatic clapping in a gym with a few thousand hostile cheering fans to be excessive either though.

Now he could have quietly or even politely call out the integrity of an official. Made a personal remark or refernence. He could have even used any of the non profane magic words "cheater . . . cheating . . .idiot . . .blind . . .etc etc." but they would probably be enough to earn him a T.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

Then I humbly request that every time I used the word profanity please replace it with 'magic words'.

That way maybe we can get past the 'small picture' and get back to the broader point(s) I was making.....

You mentioned that I referenced profanity when I did no such thing. I said "magic words."

And even if he did not use profanity, who gives a darn? I have given a coach a T in college and did not use profanity and I never was told he should have used profanity to get a T by anyone. There is no "profanity only" rule in college basketball. At least not where I work and I doubt seriously at that level as well with all the video. Heck the NCAA has made a big deal about coaches boxes and different times.

If you want to get back to the bigger picture, then stop trying to tell us some standard that has never been stated by the NCAA or conference assignors. And an official like Hess I bet knows exactly what he can do and cannot do. He did not get to where he is based on listening to people here on what is appropriate.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

Somebody point me back toward where in a book (I'd love an NCAA-W book(s) reference, but anything will do) to where the case plays for "the official shall wait until the layup is successful/unsuccessful to assess the technical foul, yadayada" is supported by a rule reference that contradicts:

"Art. 2. A live ball shall not become dead when a foul is committed by an opponent of a player who starts a try for goal before a foul occurs, provided that time does not expire before the ball is in flight."

Haven't thought about that in a couple of years, can't find things, and want to know where that lives, so that I can explain how the cited rule doesn't for some reason include the HC as an "opponent."

Found it.

Case 10.4.1 F

Originally Posted by Rule Book

A1 is driving toward the basket for an apparent goal when the official, while trailing the play advancing in the direction in which the ball is being advanced, is cursed by the head coach or bench personnel of Team B. How should the official handle the situation? RULING: The official shall withhold blowing the whistle until A1 has either made or missed the shot. The official shall then sound the whistle and assess ...a technical foul....