RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => National Federation Discussion => Topic started by: FrankNFHS on June 25, 2012, 08:29:35 AM
-
I would like to know how others are handling jewelry, particularly earrings in the following situation.
During the game, team A is having an authorized conference between the hash marks. A few of the players remove their helmets and earrings the size of those worn by NFL players are visible now that their helmets are removed.
How have you handled this?
Let me point out that I am not against men wearing earrings, not my place to judge or comment. But I do want to be consistent with the rules. This is particularly tricky because as you might expect I get the "other referees don't make us take them off"...which I'm OK with since I'm not one of those other referees that is being referred to.
-
Tell them to take them off. A football player with earrings on is an idiot, they can hurt!
"Son, I can't speak for last week's officials, but you can't play while wearing jewelry. Please take them off."
Keep your flag in your pocket, this is just a fix it.
-
If I had $1 for every time I heard, "but last week's refs..." (or the like)
Personally, "guys, you can't play with those earrings. better get off the field or get them off to get in for the next play."
-
Tell them to take them off. A football player with earrings on is an idiot, they can hurt!
"Son, I can't speak for last week's officials, but you can't play while wearing jewelry. Please take them off."
Keep your flag in your pocket, this is just a fix it.
Agree 100%, but also think addressing a player as "son" is inappropriate when coming from an official. This year's POEs will help address the issue of legal/illegal equipment and attachments.
-
You do not have to address it with the player. It needs to be addressed with the coach, he is the one responsible for his team being properly equipped. The crew should have verified this with the coach during the pre-game. You now have a decision to ask the coach to take care of the situation without penalty or go ahead and assess his him with an Unsportsmanlike for not having his team properly equipped.
-
You do not have to address it with the player. It needs to be addressed with the coach, he is the one responsible for his team being properly equipped. The crew should have verified this with the coach during the pre-game. You now have a decision to ask the coach to take care of the situation without penalty or go ahead and assess his him with an Unsportsmanlike for not having his team properly equipped.
+1 :thumbup
-
"Coach- players X, Y, & Z have earrings in and are in violation. I'd appreciate it if you'd take care of it before we start back up."
-
Thanks to all.
Sounds like the consensus clearly is that once identified, it has to be corrected, period!
I like the approach of getting the coach involved because my guess is that (similar to what happens during baseball) once I make the coach aware of an equipment issue, the coach will likely make sure other players also comply...often very directly and quickly since the coach has indicated everyone is properly and legally equipped before the game.
Much appreciation for the responses.
-
I would tell the coach that he can ware them but just can't play in this game, and if we see them in and on the field it's a USC reported against him (the coach).
-
I would tell the coach that he can ware them but just can't play in this game, and if we see them in and on the field it's a USC reported against him (the coach).
Why would you use an approach like this that is, in effect, a threat?
-
Why would you use an approach like this that is, in effect, a threat?
Agree: "He can wear the earrings, or play, not both," is sufficient. The coach knows the jewelry rule.
If he wants to argue with you, then mentioning the consequences of being in the game equipped illegally is fair game.
-
Why would you use an approach like this that is, in effect, a threat?
Agree: "He can wear the earrings, or play, not both," is sufficient. The coach knows the jewelry rule.
I think i was saying is the same thing that everyone else is saying, you can leave them in and don't play, but if you take them out then he play's. We're giving them a choice.
-
Why would you use an approach like this that is, in effect, a threat?
Agree: "He can wear the earrings, or play, not both," is sufficient. The coach knows the jewelry rule.
I think i was saying is the same thing that everyone else is saying, you can leave them in and don't play, but if you take them out then he play's. We're giving them a choice.
My point being it's all in how you present it. Being a good communicator, and making them LIKE what you are saying (whether or not they do), is half of the battle. You don't have to be combative to make your point to a coach.
-
My point being it's all in how you present it. Being a good communicator, and making them LIKE what you are saying (whether or not they do), is half of the battle. You don't have to be combative to make your point to a coach.
THANK YOU!
All too often, we see officials that speak to us in a manner that says, "I'm in charge, and there's nothing you can do about it." Nothing will kill a rating (or a career) faster than having a chip on your shoulder.
Speaking in a cooperative manner goes a long way to getting the same result, and now the coach doesn't think you're an IDIOT. To those that say, "I don't care what a coach thinks of me", unless you are retiring after the game, you had better, because either directly or indirectly, they are going to affect your career.
-
Atlanta Blue,
You should have stopped while you were ahead. Good communication will prevent a lot of problems and will help you in gaining respect from coaches. But the moment, we begin worrying about our careers because of what coaches think of us then we begin doing a disservice to the game.
Todd
PS: Rulesman is correct.
-
THANK YOU!
All too often, we see officials that speak to us in a manner that says, "I'm in charge, and there's nothing you can do about it." Nothing will kill a rating (or a career) faster than having a chip on your shoulder.
Speaking in a cooperative manner goes a long way to getting the same result, and now the coach doesn't think you're an IDIOT. To those that say, "I don't care what a coach thinks of me", unless you are retiring after the game, you had better, because either directly or indirectly, they are going to affect your career.
AB, what I offered works both ways. I agree with ECILLJ. Your points were right on the mark until you got to the last sentence. I'd call it a little condescending, at best. We need to earn your respect just as much as you should work to earn ours.
-
Speaking to all participants with respect is part of proper game management. Proper game management is a mark of a good official. Good officials have good careers.
Worrying about advancing one's career for its own sake and not as a result of being a good official distracts from the job of officiating and leads to excessive concern with things not directly in our control, such as evaluator opinions.
Do a good job in every respect, and let advancement come as it may.
-
You do not have to address it with the player. It needs to be addressed with the coach, he is the one responsible for his team being properly equipped. The crew should have verified this with the coach during the pre-game. You now have a decision to ask the coach to take care of the situation without penalty or go ahead and assess his him with an Unsportsmanlike for not having his team properly equipped.
Absolutely!
-
My point being it's all in how you present it. Being a good communicator, and making them LIKE what you are saying (whether or not they do), is half of the battle. You don't have to be combative to make your point to a coach.
OK i see what you are saying, I didn't think about it being combative or that to harsh. I was just trying to to make it easy for the kid to understand, but that never crossed my mind, thanks
-
Your points were right on the mark until you got to the last sentence. I'd call it a little condescending, at best.
The last sentence was directed at those that read the first part and said, "I don't give a d#mn what a coach thinks, I'm in charge, and if he doesn't like it, tough noogies. I will dictate what will happen here."
And unfortunately, we run across a few of those each year. Thankfully, it is not the majority, but it tends to be the same officials to whom the first advice was needed.
Look, this isn't just a coach talking. In football, I have never officiated outside of college intramurals. But in baseball, I have an extensive resume at some pretty decent levels. The same thing exists there as well. If I'm the umpire and I need to let a coach know something, there is a polite way of doing it without being dictorial about it. Now, if he is out of control, there is a time and a place to handle confrontation, although I hate what I see with MLB umpires yelling back at coaches in an argument. There is no need. He gets a little room, I don't need to yell back, I just need to let him know we are done. If he chooses not to end it there, I will, then I walk away. There is never a need to yell or talk down to a coach, I don't care how big of an IDIOT he is being.
-
There is never a need to yell or talk down to a coach, I don't care how big of an butt he is being.
Well said. There's should be at least one calm person on the field and that should always be the official.
-
Well said. There's should be at least one calm person on the field and that should always be the official.
Agree, and agree with AB's sentiment as well.
How do you expect to manage a game if you can't even manage your own temper?
-
I agree with all of the above. But I will reiterate my earlier comments also included coaches. Communication and respect works both ways. Unfortunately, there are coaches who think they are bigger than the game .
-
I agree with all of the above. But I will reiterate my earlier comments also included coaches. Communication and respect works both ways. Unfortunately, there are coaches who think they are bigger than the game .
Yes, there are, and I don't tolerate them well either. But think about the situation as well. For that coach, that's his job. For the the official, it's an avocation. Putting food on the table and paying the mortage depend on the outcome of a series of games, so obviously he is vested in the outcome, while the official is not. And while I fully understand the amount of time that an official spends studying, being tested, travelling and working, I also know it doesn't come close to approaching the time the coach has invested.
Does that give the coach an EXCUSE to be a jacka$$? Of course not. But it may add a little to the understanding of why he is yelling on the sideline. It's hard not to be emotional when you have so much biased interest in the outcome.
And that is why I think Kalle put it well: there needs to be at least one calm person in the discussion, and for better or worse, that has to be the official.
-
"For the the official, it's an avocation. Putting food on the table and paying the mortage depend on the outcome of a series of games, so obviously he is vested in the outcome, while the official is not."
Atlanta Blue, we are talking high school football. Give us a break. Coaches are teachers and that is their avocation. Please don't allow excuses for people who who do not conduct themselves within the rules of the sport.
-
Reading through all of these posts reminds me of the quote pounded into my head during my first few days of Officer Training.. and I think it is far reaching and covers almost every level of interaction on the field.
"No man is fit to command another, that cannot command himself"
-
"For the the official, it's an avocation. Putting food on the table and paying the mortage depend on the outcome of a series of games, so obviously he is vested in the outcome, while the official is not."
Atlanta Blue, we are talking high school football. Give us a break. Coaches are teachers and that is their avocation. Please don't allow excuses for people who who do not conduct themselves within the rules of the sport.
+1
-
"For the the official, it's an avocation. Putting food on the table and paying the mortage depend on the outcome of a series of games, so obviously he is vested in the outcome, while the official is not."
Nor should he (the official) be. As Abe Lemons said: "the problem with officials is that they don't care who wins..."
Atlanta Blue, we are talking high school football. Give us a break. Coaches are teachers and that is their avocation. Please don't allow excuses for people who who do not conduct themselves within the rules of the sport.
I only wish they were required to be "teachers" - in every sense of the word. These days, too many coaches leave "acceptable behavior" at the the classroom door; and a growing percentage of coaches (for many, including financial, reasons) are not educators or are never in the building (other than the locker room). That's NOT meant as an indictment of all "non-teachers" who coach. Is that pressure to win? Probably; but that is no excuse for acting poorly (for which we have remedies). But, similarly, AB has a point in that EVERY PARTICIPANT deserves his/her respect. Making a coach an adversary isn't going to make your evening go any better. Arrogance is just stupid!
Stay professional my friends!!!! yEs:
-
Coaches are teachers
In most instances, true. However many are hired for their skill and success as coaches, not because they are the best chemistry instructor in the state. For some, their jobs are truly on the line. Our local head coach's salary is supplemented for "mowing the field" even though we've had turf since 2008.
It boils down to this, neither party needs to act like an IDIOT, but circumstances sometimes get the best of any of us. Sadly, poor behavior is tolerated more readily from coaches. Officials are expected to be the "better man".
-
In any discussion on the football field, there must be at least one adult. Our job as officials is to make sure that we're the one.
-
Atlanta Blue, we are talking high school football. Give us a break. Coaches are teachers and that is their avocation. Please don't allow excuses for people who who do not conduct themselves within the rules of the sport.
In most major programs today, the head coach is rarely a teacher. If he is, he was hired as a football coach first, and they then found him a teaching spot. Even on our staff, the assistants who are teachers, took the job as football coaches, and if they weren't coaches, they would not be there.
And if that head coach loses his coaching job, he also loses his teaching job. They days of a teacher taking on the extra responsibility of being the head football coach are gone, at least in any major program.
And that still doesn't give ANY coach the right to be a complete jackass, I'm not excusing that. I am offering a view point from that side of the sideline that explains some of the mentality. I've worked both sides of the line, umpiring D1 baseball, and coaching HS football. The mentality of the two is VERY different, and yes, I expect officials to maintain their cool even of coaches don't. I expect if I'm the coach, and I expect it from myself if I'm the umpire.