Bring coaches together?

[Scrapper1]

I'm doing my iRef training and there's a "What would you do?" question about a lengthy delay to fix a scoring question. The result is to the detriment of Team B. And the trainer says to go to Coach B first since s/he is the one receiving the bad news.

Is there a compelling reason to give the information to the coaches separately? My basketball background says to bring the coaches together. This ensures that (1) neither coach thinks something is said about them; and (2) if there's a suggestion that you said something inappropriate, there's a witness to the conversation.

Would I be given a bad grade for bringing the coaches together to tell them the result of the scoring review?

[Lcubed48]

I can't answer your last question. I would be in agreement with you, but my initial training is also in the care and feeding of basketball coaches. Bring both coaches together to explain your decision, and move on.

["Lurker"77]

(Qualifiers: I am a primarily a coach. I am flexible and open to common sense and hear what the above posters as saying. I'll let someone else quote chapter and verse if needed.)

I would error toward protocol and keeping coaches contained in their proper areas. I stretch/break protocol as much as anyone in the amount I directly interact with scorers as a coach without going through the R2. However, once there is a real problem, even I know there are practical reasons to give the table a wide berth and wait to have the official give me the final verdict.

There might be exceptions, but to make it explicit, I'd be most concerned about unhelpful interactions between coach and scorer and quickly getting (upset) coaches back to their areas when everyone else is ready to resume play. If coaches are in front of their benches, those are less of an issue. It is a few extra steps and the second conversation is likely even shorter than the first.

[Scrapper1]

Interesting point, Coach. Thank you for the insight!

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I'm doing my iRef training and there's a "What would you do?" question about a lengthy delay to fix a scoring question. The result is to the detriment of Team B. And the trainer says to go to Coach B first since s/he is the one receiving the bad news.

Is there a compelling reason to give the information to the coaches separately? My basketball background says to bring the coaches together. This ensures that (1) neither coach thinks something is said about them; and (2) if there's a suggestion that you said something inappropriate, there's a witness to the conversation.

Would I be given a bad grade for bringing the coaches together to tell them the result of the scoring review?

If the result is to the detriment of Team B, I'm not sure there' much that needs to be said to Coach A other than a "we're good now."

[Scrapper1]

This is a very complicated CRS situation, but also involves a scoring error. And in this case, contrary to the iRef module, the R2 brings the two coaches together. I heartily endorse this procedure.

I hope you can view the video without belonging to RefQuest.

https://plus.refquest.com/videos/OA4...uU8K2dCr9ACWX?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

This is a very complicated CRS situation, but also involves a scoring error. And in this case, contrary to the iRef module, the R2 brings the two coaches together. I heartily endorse this procedure.

I hope you can view the video without belonging to RefQuest.

https://plus.refquest.com/videos/OA4...uU8K2dCr9ACWX?

A few things left unanswered in that video -- but a good learning experience. Wonder if it will lead to a rule change / clarification / interp.

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

This is a very complicated CRS situation, but also involves a scoring error. And in this case, contrary to the iRef module, the R2 brings the two coaches together. I heartily endorse this procedure.

I hope you can view the video without belonging to RefQuest.

https://plus.refquest.com/videos/OA4...uU8K2dCr9ACWX?

Unfortunate situation, but Suzanne (R2) is really good people, and I loved how she on multiple occasions made it clear it was totally her fault. Luckily Katie (PSU) and Jen (OSU), while being very competitive people/coaches, were very nice about it and reacted in a way we would hope coaches would.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Wonder if it will lead to a rule change / clarification / interp.

Here's the memo that accompanied the video:



UNIQUE SITUATION/TEACHABLE MOMENT

This document is being uploaded to the National Coordinator – Notes section because it contains a lot of information that accompanies the video titled “Teachable Moment – CRS – R2 Misspoke”.

As you watch the video, you will see a situation that can cause nightmares for us all. A challenged result in which the referees inadvertently award a point and the ball to the wrong team. The referees then determine the mistake after several additional points have been scored. Here is the sequence of events that you will see on the video (the video is the full
sequence of events, which is necessary for clarity):

• This is set 4 of the match between Ohio State (OSU) and Penn State (PSU) with the score of OSU 18-PSU 17
• PSU attacks a ball that is called in by the line judge and R1 – Score OSU 18-PSU 18
• OSU challenges that the ball was out
• The review shows the ball is clearly out. The call is reversed, point OSU, OSU maintains their challenge... at least that is what should have happened
• During the challenge reveal we see the first hint of the issue. The R2 correctly says the ball is out, but incorrectly states that PSU wins the point and OSU has lost their challenge (and the announcers are confused)
• Due to the first part of the announcement (saying the ball was out), you will see the score on TV switch to OSU 19-PSU 17
• The R2 then mistakenly re-awards the serve to PSU (and the announcers are more confused)
• PSU serves and a long rally ensues. You will notice that the score changes during the rally back to OSU 18-PSU 18
• This rally is won by OSU. Scoreboard now shows OSU 19-PSU 18
• OSU now serves and wins another rally. Scoreboard now shows OSU 20-PSU 18
• PSU calls timeout
• During the timeout, someone at the score table asks for clarification as to why PSU was given a point after the challenge when they were the team that hit the ball out
• The R2, realizing her mistake, has a conference with the R1 to explain the error and they quickly assess their options
• The R2 then lets everyone at the score table know how they will proceed. Their decision is to remove the 1 point accidentally awarded to PSU and award it to OSU. But all other actions remained because there had been a term of service ended for PSU and a term of service started, with a serve, for OSU – No other actions were made to the score other than to act on the point mistakenly awarded, and to ensure that OSU was not charged
with a lost challenge
• The R2 then had the unenviable task of telling the coaches about her mistake and how it was going to be rectified. The scoreboard now shows OSU 21-PSU 17
• The set and match then continued from that point, with PSU winning in 5 sets


Question – Was the situation handled correctly?

We are sure there are arguments for either yes or no on how the situation was handled by the officials. Volleyball is a dynamic sport! Use of the challenge review system (CRS) has provided coaches the opportunity to have officials review decisions, and the officials now have an additional tool to view plays from multiple angles – ultimately with the goal to make the correct decision. CRS has greatly improved coach/referee relationships. And as the use of the CRS system continues to expand, each year situations arise that have not been specifically addressed. Due to that, the first CRS Manual was developed and issued this year specifically to address CRS situations. Unfortunately, the situation encountered in this match is not specifically
addressed in the rules book or the CRS Manual. That being said, the Secretary Rules Editor and I are satisfied with how this situation was handled.

Now, let’s talk about a few of the rules that might be at play here:

• Rule 19.1.4.1 – Correctable Error – This rule is kind of in play here, but not directly. The score was originally adjusted based on the wrong information given by the R2, albeit to the scorers and not the teams. So, the point inadvertently awarded to the wrong team could be corrected once discovered later in the match
• Rule 13.2.3 – Rotation Faults – You might consider getting some guidance here as it pertains to points scored that remain versus points that are removed. However, none of that information has relevance in this situation as we do not have an illegal server. So, while it is important to consider all possible solutions, it is equally as important to move on from rules that are not of importance for the situation at hand
• In a nutshell, none of our main rules or CRS interpretations totally apply here. So, we will go to Rule 19.2.2.2 which provides the first referee to “Have authority over all decisions including those not specifically addressed in the rules”. The R1 (and R2) used their knowledge of the rules book and the applicable parts of the rules and interpretations to come to the best judgement and outcome in the moment What can we learn from this situation?
• It is very important to know your rules book! Especially the rules that pertain to rare situations that you may never see. You need to be prepared, just in case
• In these situations, the referee team will be looked to as the authority of the rules, and their knowledge will hopefully be trusted to get to the correct outcome. Not every team/coach will accept the officiating decisions as well as these two coaches did, but a firm and in control explanation of what happened and what the outcome will be is your only tool to get through these kinds of tough situations. Clearly these coaches respected the officiating crew enough to accept the decision made in this match! One
of your goals should be to earn that same level of respect from the coaches and teams to which you provide service
• How important it is to stay calm in this kind of situation! Panic only leads to more mistakes and doubt
• Admitting your mistake and calmly explaining how the mistake is going to be rectified will help all involved “accept” the decision in the moment, hopefully. This situation could have been much worse if the referees just said let’s pretend it didn’t happen, nobody will ever find out – Somebody will always find out, no matter the level/school/division
• Put this situation, and how it was handled, into your toolbox. Using proper
communication with your officiating team can help ensure the correct team receives the point after a challenge (see proper officiating technique below). Then hopefully you should never need this tool in your career!

Proper officiating techniques to prevent this situation from ever happening
1. After the review, confirm with the R1, via headsets (if worn):
a. What was the original decision
b. Which team challenged
c. Was the original decision confirmed/stands or reversed
d. Which team should be awarded the ball and serve
e. Make sure BOTH referees are on the same page. The R1 is not a bystander
during CRS! They need to make sure the decision made as a result of the review is awarded correctly

2. After the review, confirm with the scorer
a. It is important to give the scorer correct information at the beginning of the challenge - What was the original decision and CRS category of the challenge. Do not assume they know what is going on
b. Give them specific information on the result of the challenge: The call is
confirmed/stands/reversed; the point remains with... -or- the point is now
awarded to...
c. If both sets of information are correct, the scorer can help make sure the correct team is awarded the ball

What are our takeaways from this situation?

• We are the third team on the court. And a team helps and looks out for each other! Somebody should have asked the question “WHY?”! Why is PSU serving? Why did PSU still win the point after the challenge?
• It doesn’t matter who you are working with! Every referee, from our very best to our brand-newbies, makes mistakes! We must be strong/brave/confident enough to say something doesn’t make sense! Asking for a quick clarification in a situation is not telling someone they are wrong; it is making sure our team is ready to move forward with a clear head and without an issue possibly raising up later
• This is a scary situation that could cause a match to become the biggest nightmare in a referee’s career! But with calm heads and humility, this situation was handled with such class that it became a small blip on the radar (well, except for the referees, who probably didn’t sleep a wink that night thinking about this situation)