Referees talking to players

[WVFrank]

Why does a ref feel compelled to warn players of their actions? Some do and some don't.

 

I can only speak for why I did it when I officiated. I saw no reason to see an impending violation that was unnecessary and let it go when it was correctable. For example, on a free throw or a jump ball, if I saw a player with their foot on the line, a violation once the ball is put in play, I would say "No. 32, get your foot off the line" or "No. 32, watch your foot". I just thought it better to prevent it from happening if I could.

 

The game is extremely fast and I think an official could blow his/her whistle every few seconds if they wished. That really bogs the game down. I played a ton of BB and felt like I had a pretty good feel for the game so I officiated to be as invisible as possible yet keep things in control. I used what I'll term now (never really thought that much about it at the time) as "advantage/disadvantage". I would let players play, use their hands in a manner that, per the book, was against the rules.............as long as it didn't provide one player an advantage and put another at a disadvantage.

 

I would allow a defensive player to "feel" his man, touch him for location while watching the ball, as long as he didn't hold him. Being more defensively oriented as a young player I knew that completely hands off against a really good player was a killer for the defender.

 

Now if that defender began to hold a bit, or push a bit, or do something that gave him a "potential" advantage, then I took it more seiously. The first time I saw it.......and it had no effect on the play.......I'd warn the defender. Maybe even a second time. At some point after a warning or two, or if it became evident the player simply wasn't going to listen, I'd call a foul.

 

Of course if the very first offense created an advantage, let's say a grab preventing the offensive player from being able to get to a pass, there were no warnings, a foul was called.

 

Those are my thoughts on what I did and why. Many of my fellow officials at the time did the same. Generally, at least from my perspective, the officials who didn't do things this way had not played a lot of basketball. Probably a bias on my part but, I always felt most of the better officials had played the game and thus had a "feel" that one can't get otherwise.

[Sweeperboy]

If the refs are calling your opponent's kids by name in the pre game meeting with the captains, then you could be in trouble.

 

Can you say HOMER. :scared: 20n10

[PutMeInCoach]

If you Ref a girl for multiple years your going to get to know the girl enough to know her name. I see nothing wrong with this.

[Theoldguy]

Not basketball but in baseball I used to and I know a lot of your better catchers use to have a running conversation with the man in blue behind the plate.

[PutMeInCoach]

Not basketball but in baseball I used to and I know a lot of your better catchers use to have a running conversation with the man in blue behind the plate.

 

Every time I played a sport I talked to the Ref's. I knew many of the football officials by name, I never played school basketball but in the pickup leagues I knew every refs name.

[Sonny Crockett]

What game was this in?

 

Holy Cross/Conner

[nWo]

I would have no problem with an official calling a player by his or her first name.

[Big Slick]

If I am on the ladder in volleyball, I will address both captains by their first names during the match. It seems to work a lot better then saying hey #14 and by the time they realize you are talking to them it delays the game.

[kinglouie]

I personally do not see a problem with it, but if I was an official I would be very careful when doing so. As stated above, it can give the perception of 'homerism' which obviously any good official would not want to give. So, I would not expect too many cases of this to happen.

[imo]

I personally do not see a problem with it, but if I was an official I would be very careful when doing so. As stated above, it can give the perception of 'homerism' which obviously any good official would not want to give. So, I would not expect too many cases of this to happen.

 

I agree. If you know all players by both teams and plan to address them all by their first name then by all means, go ahead. But if you only know one or a few and if they are on the same team then it really looks bad.

 

Maybe it should be another thread but what do you think about an opposing coach talking to your players during play in a, for lack of a better word, "taunting" manner? I know of a game where this happened several times during the game when the players were in front of the opposing team's bench. It was messing with the players concentration to hear someone addressing them at that end of the court followed by smart alec comment, which is what I'm sure the coach was trying to do. I just thought it was really poor sportsmanship on the part of the coach.

[kinglouie]

I agree. If you know all players by both teams and plan to address them all by their first name then by all means, go ahead. But if you only know one or a few and if they are on the same team then it really looks bad.

 

Maybe it should be another thread but what do you think about an opposing coach talking to your players during play in a, for lack of a better word, "taunting" manner? I know of a game where this happened several times during the game when the players were in front of the opposing team's bench. It was messing with the players concentration to hear someone addressing them at that end of the court followed by smart alec comment, which is what I'm sure the coach was trying to do. I just thought it was really poor sportsmanship on the part of the coach.

 

Oh man - that is totally uncalled for. That coach should be spending all his time, energy and focus on coaching his team. Time spent away from that si detracting from making his team, and players better.

[SKINPIG]

I can only speak for why I did it when I officiated. I saw no reason to see an impending violation that was unnecessary and let it go when it was correctable. For example, on a free throw or a jump ball, if I saw a player with their foot on the line, a violation once the ball is put in play, I would say "No. 32, get your foot off the line" or "No. 32, watch your foot". I just thought it better to prevent it from happening if I could.

 

The game is extremely fast and I think an official could blow his/her whistle every few seconds if they wished. That really bogs the game down. I played a ton of BB and felt like I had a pretty good feel for the game so I officiated to be as invisible as possible yet keep things in control. I used what I'll term now (never really thought that much about it at the time) as "advantage/disadvantage". I would let players play, use their hands in a manner that, per the book, was against the rules.............as long as it didn't provide one player an advantage and put another at a disadvantage.

 

I would allow a defensive player to "feel" his man, touch him for location while watching the ball, as long as he didn't hold him. Being more defensively oriented as a young player I knew that completely hands off against a really good player was a killer for the defender.

 

Now if that defender began to hold a bit, or push a bit, or do something that gave him a "potential" advantage, then I took it more seiously. The first time I saw it.......and it had no effect on the play.......I'd warn the defender. Maybe even a second time. At some point after a warning or two, or if it became evident the player simply wasn't going to listen, I'd call a foul.

 

Of course if the very first offense created an advantage, let's say a grab preventing the offensive player from being able to get to a pass, there were no warnings, a foul was called.

 

Those are my thoughts on what I did and why. Many of my fellow officials at the time did the same. Generally, at least from my perspective, the officials who didn't do things this way had not played a lot of basketball. Probably a bias on my part but, I always felt most of the better officials had played the game and thus had a "feel" that one can't get otherwise.

 

:thumb::thumb:

[nkyvbfan]

I agree. If you know all players by both teams and plan to address them all by their first name then by all means, go ahead. But if you only know one or a few and if they are on the same team then it really looks bad.

 

Maybe it should be another thread but what do you think about an opposing coach talking to your players during play in a, for lack of a better word, "taunting" manner? I know of a game where this happened several times during the game when the players were in front of the opposing team's bench. It was messing with the players concentration to hear someone addressing them at that end of the court followed by smart alec comment, which is what I'm sure the coach was trying to do. I just thought it was really poor sportsmanship on the part of the coach.

I guess you have to take the good with the bad. I have heard an opposing coach compliment a player on the other team for a "good ball" or "nice shot" while using their name. As far as using their name with a negative comment, it happens. While I believe it's wrong, the player should be able to ignore it (if they even hear it) during play.

[imo]

I guess you have to take the good with the bad. I have heard an opposing coach compliment a player on the other team for a "good ball" or "nice shot" while using their name. As far as using their name with a negative comment, it happens. While I believe it's wrong, the player should be able to ignore it (if they even hear it) during play.

 

I also think compliments should be made after the game during the handshake and not during play. I just think a coach should only be addressing his own players during a game.

 

And besides, a compliment is a compliment, and that is a positive. It's almost like saying it's okay to push a player down after a whistle as long as you help another player up later in the game. Why should there be the "bad" at all? Would be nice if there was just the "good". But I realize this isn't a perfect world.

 

If a coach is doing something unsportsmanlike should it be overlooked because he/she, or another coach says something nice at another time? After all these are the adults that kids are looking at as examples. As adults shouldn't they set good examples?

[nkyvbfan]

I agree that all communication should take place after the game has ended. I would think that most players are so focused on the game that they wouldn't hear the opposing coach anyway.

 

You're correct that an opposing coach using a player's name should be a different thread.