Can an official besides the WH eject players/coaches if he sees fit?

[Brandon Kincer]

We have this guy that works with me in rec and he comes to his game looking like a thug. Hat crooked, shirt untucked, etc. You'd have a field day with this guy lol. That is also a pet peeve of mine. If your going to play the role you need to look the role.

[Forksref]

I will say to the coach, "Number 42 has disqualified himself." That puts the onus on the player and coach. Usually, the coach will direct his questions/frustrations toward the player, not the officials.

[Brandon Kincer]

A poll has been added to this thread please vote accordingly

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Brandon Kincer

We have this guy that works with me in rec and he comes to his game looking like a thug. Hat crooked, shirt untucked, etc. You'd have a field day with this guy lol. That is also a pet peeve of mine. If your going to play the role you need to look the role.

Everyone makes a choice, Brandon, do they start out on the right foot, or the wrong one. There are always two ways to learn, watch someone doing it right, and emulate him or watch someone doing it wrong, and vow to do the opposite.

When you're new at something, criticizing others who may be doing something you perceive as wrong, even though you may be 100% accurate, is usually not a great way to endear yourself with your peers.

On a good day, even the very best of us should appreciate and accept constructive criticism, or be willing to explain what you might perceive as something questionable. Reality dictates that the newer you are, the more subtle and diplomatic your question or criticism might need to be to be considered constructive.

It's often better to simply decide, rather than speculate or criticize, to just consider the action (behavior, appearance, demeanor) and decide for myself to either emulate it or to avoid ever repeating it.

As you gain experience, hopefully you'll come to understand we get better at a lot of things on a week to week basis, but other things, or habits, take longer to work through and that very often we respond to a certain play, somewhat differently than usual, because of the unique circumstances of that particular play, which might be a good adjustment, or sometimes not.

The person you'll get the most benefit out of critiquing, even to the nit-picking level, is yourself, because you'll recognize a lot more mistakes you make than anybody else will and you should understand better what you may have done wrong.

[With_Two_Flakes]

A tip I was given in 1985 when I started officiating was to keep a logbook of every game I worked. For my first few years, I would write down what I did good and what I messed up (as well as basic stuff like the date, the teams, the score, the rest of the crew and who worked where). It helped me identify trends in my officiating so I knew what my weak areas were and I could work on them to try and improve.

Even today, I still keep a log of the date, teams, score, the rest of the crew and who worked where. But that's more to do with the memory not being what it was, as it drives me nuts trying to recall whether I'd worked with some guy before or not.

My local officials association have adopted that idea for our formal rookie training program. A rookie has a logbook and must get it filled in for his first 10 games by the crew - they say what he did good, what he needs to work on and the White Hat signs it off. We strongly encourage our newer guys to continue by keeping their own logbook themselves after those first 10 games.

Originally Posted by With_Two_Flakes

A tip I was given in 1985 when I started officiating was to keep a logbook of every game I worked. For my first few years, I would write down what I did good and what I messed up (as well as basic stuff like the date, the teams, the score, the rest of the crew and who worked where). It helped me identify trends in my officiating so I knew what my weak areas were and I could work on them to try and improve.

Even today, I still keep a log of the date, teams, score, the rest of the crew and who worked where. But that's more to do with the memory not being what it was, as it drives me nuts trying to recall whether I'd worked with some guy before or not.

My local officials association have adopted that idea for our formal rookie training program. A rookie has a logbook and must get it filled in for his first 10 games by the crew - they say what he did good, what he needs to work on and the White Hat signs it off. We strongly encourage our newer guys to continue by keeping their own logbook themselves after those first 10 games.

And make sure you don't leave it in a piece of furniture the ex-wife is taking with her. I had one, couldn't find it, realized it was in a hutch that my ex took with her when she moved out. I asked her for it to be returned, she claimed she didn't have it. It showed up over a year and a half later in court, as an attempt to discredit me as an inefficient person as a whole (child custody was a factor). My attorney objected to it's relevance. The judge allowed it, but only after I made the comment that I don't appreciate being shown up in front of a fellow official (the judge is a high school soccer official), for which I got a stern talking to from the judge.

[Brandon Kincer]

I try to keep a mental note of what went wrong and what was right. Usually but not always, if a white hat questions my call ill ask him to decribe to me what exactly the call im calling is. After he describes it to me ill confirm that that is indeed what I saw. if it is what I saw. (Ex. I call a false start, The white hat questions me and I ask him what exactly is a false start to be sure. He'll reply its when a offensive player gives any sign that the play has started before the ball is actually hiked and ill say I saw #82 jump the first time the snapper said "hike") and it usually ends there but sometimes ill have a white hat waive off a call because he himself did not see it. I guess it depends on who your working with. Either way im always appreciative of any constructive criticism I get. It might sting a little while its being delivered but after the game im always willing to go up and shake the man's hand that gave it to me.

[Mike L]

I strongly suggest you know what your foul is and are absolutely sure of it before throwing your flag. And if I ask what you saw and when you saw it, you better have the answers or you had no business throwing the flag. Questioning the WH about a call YOU have while reporting it to him is not going to give the impression you probably want to make. You want to ask me during a time out, before the game, or after the game, no problem. I'm not trying to be a tyrant, but you have to understand if you come to me to report a foul and start asking me questions on what qualifies for that foul, I'm thinking you are not really sure at all about what you saw and I'm going to suggest we pick that flag up.

[Brandon Kincer]

Originally Posted by Mike L

I strongly suggest you know what your foul is and are absolutely sure of it before throwing your flag. And if I ask what you saw and when you saw it, you better have the answers or you had no business throwing the flag. Questioning the WH about a call YOU have while reporting it to him is not going to give the impression you probably want to make. You want to ask me during a time out, before the game, or after the game, no problem. I'm not trying to be a tyrant, but you have to understand if you come to me to report a foul and start asking me questions on what qualifies for that foul, I'm thinking you are not really sure at all about what you saw and I'm going to suggest we pick that flag up.

99.9% of the time i am 100% sure of the call when I throw the flag. If the white hat questions my call I do not have a problem explaining it to him. If I throw a flag and I think its questionable I will tell the white hat "Here's what I saw....." I don't claim to be perfect but like I said.....I have no problem being corrected.