^^ I think the Perth incident was Gleeson?

He did get ejected when that happened.

Didnt really run into the ref either, he just didnt get out of the way as the ref was running up the side of the court, watching the game instead of watching the coach...

In this instance, both parties are guilty, Woolpert for losing his cool on a trivial issue and the ref for overreacting.

Where the ref really went on his powertrip was by formally reporting Woolpert for a cut-and-dry issue that was more than adequately dealt with in-game. Referees need to remove "having their feelings hurt" from any officiating process.

Many of the comments in this post and in the previous post on this subject only go to prove the point (IMO) that officials/referees in basketball (at ALL levels) in Australia are treated poorly and with contempt, unfortunately by people who do not have a strong understanding of the rules. I stated in the previous post that referees in the NBA are treated with respect and their decisions are backed by the NBA administration. I do not believe that this is the case in the NBL given the comments by Peter Carey (who has NEVER actually refereed at the NBL level). From all reports Woolpert "was over the top" and was treated accordingly within the rules. The fact that he was then reported was also the correct decision. Carey's comments now give Townsville an "out" to allow any penalty to be "punitive" in the least. This type of comment would never have happened in the NBA because the NBA "RESPECTS AND SUPPORTS IT'S REFEREES". The comments from Brendan Joyce are laughable. Brendan has never had any respect for referees, from his playing days to his coaching. An example is the fact that as a spectator at a junior championship in Adelaide he was spoken to by officials for his rants at referees during a game and playing on his own self importance as an NBL (at the time) coach. I think that shows who "is on a power trip". The major problem with the way officials in most sports in Australia are treated and perceived is the "convict" type mentality towards authority and the "us" and "them" attitude. Until that attitude is changed (and it probably never will because it is ingrained) then officials/referees in sport in Australia will always be seen as the enemy.

Mick, do you know what Woolpert said in his rant?

For example if he audibly called the referee a cheat then I would expect him to be ejected, reported and go for a fine or suspension given how seriously this sort of allegation/statement can be treated.

If he just bitched about the call or about the earlier tech then maybe not.

So Mick, tell me how the referee over reacted? You can see clearly in the vision from the game that he warns coach to not yell at him across the court as he will be technical fouled-this action was not taking a sledgehammer to a peanut.
As he then returned to position the coach then yells at him across the court! This then is penalised by a technical foul.
At this point the coach then steps in court, shakes a fist at the referee and yells at him that it's fucken bullshit. How should that not be penalised by another technical foul?
The coaches behaviour past that point was absolutely disgraceful and no matter the circumstances should never happen or be tolerated. That is why he was reported, not for his behaviour in being ejected but following the ejection.

Sorry Mick I missed your post prior to commenting. Mick, you are a prime example of the attitude of people to officials in general. Have you ever officiated any form of sport - apparently not - otherwise you would not make stupid, ingnorant and uninformed comments.

ANON12, it'd be worth factoring in Mick's being a Townsville fan. Might have influenced his comment. At least he put some blame on Woolpert - that's a start!

No no you have got me wrong of course he should have been ejected for raving like madman, no matter whether his arguments were valid or not. I question whether then reporting him was necessary, and as an (purely hypothetical) aside wonder whether the same would have happened had the crocs lost.

Not defending Woolpert at all. While the crocs were definitely hard done by on some obvious calls, the one that made him blow up was the correct call anyway (I believe it was a non call where gill faded backwards away from an upright static defender on a shot attempt and fell down).

I think the incident was dealt with adequately in game and further reporting and punishment entirely unnecessary. The worst language I saw Woolpert use was "this is bullshit", and was only yelled post-ejection. Hardly abusive. Aylen is an experienced official and I thought the reporting of the incident showed a lack of confidence in himself of dealing with an on court issue.

Not sure if this is what happened here, but I hate when a referee cites "arguing" when a captain or coach asks for an explanation of a call (and this is an aside as Woolpert was agitated and not calm). I once was t'd for asking if a foul in a club game was a hands or body foul, so I could adjust the way I was playing D to suit and avoid the same call the next time down the court. Another ref would have calmly explained it to me in the downtime while the opponent was shooting free throws and subs coming in. This is a bit of a grey area with officiating, I know the rules state explicitly what kind of conversation is allowed between officials and players on the court, but every referee interprets this differently - some will explain calmly and without ego the call if politely asked, while others will treat you like a prisoner in 24hr solitary confinement in a high security prison who has a highly infectious disease. Of course constant questioning is annoying, but a once or twice a game explanation to a player or coach without any ego in the tone of voice (from either party) should be encouraged.

Mick, I reckon you are correct when you say that Ref's should be able to answer questions of coaches and players if they politely ask for explanation.

The word politely is the problem though.

In this case the Townsville coach was obviously complaining a lot and yelling across the court which all the coaches would be aware that is against the rules.

Aylen took the opportunity to head across during a stoppage and warn the coach that he should not yell across the court and gave him a chance

Of course the coach then takes this opportunity to complain more and yell more, in fact Aylen actually made sure he headed back across the court quickly after giving the warning which means if the coach wanted to argue the point he had to do it by yelling across the court which was exactly the instruction which Aylen had asked him politely not to do

The problem is that Officials can encourage positive communication all they like but if the coaches & players are rude and disrespectful then they should be dealt with accordingly otherwise the ref would loose respect anyway

So if Aylen hadn't gone back across the court the coach would not have needed to yell 'across the cour.t'


so you are saying it is the reds fault for creating he need for the poor communication?

Strange thing is Woolpert is normally the calmest coach in the league - he has an on court demeanour akin to a phil jackson or someone. I wonder what Aylen said to fire him up like that?

I can understand him making a snide, disrespectful comment in a calm, collected way, but the way he blew up like a raving madman is out completely of character, and is the sole reason I think Aylen MAY have said something to bait him.

AND BEFORE ALL YOU OFFICIALS BLAST ME HERE: I'm merely speculating. Just seems really out of character.

Your thoughts?

In reviewing the footage just now, it's clear that Woolpert was engaging in normal ref/coach banter, then pushed it too far, which is fine normal tech call.

The second second technical, that's when he blew up.

I don't think anyone is arguing the first T, it's whether the second was really absolutely necessary immediately afterwards.

Some AFL-watchers thought the umpires , all wired up , go OTT for the TV.
In our sport , the oncourt captain can ask for interpretations.

Do all ejections from two technical fouls result in facing the tribunal? For players and/or coaches?

Why did they only shoot 2 free throws and not 4? My understanding is that Aylen gave a warning, then gave a Tech. Woolpert went ape shit and Aylen said he could leave however only the single Tech was given hence the 2 free throws and not 4.

Players, Coaches and Referees have to adjust for each other. Aylen gave the Tech to Saville for trash talking. It was obvious from there he wasn't putting up with anything this game. Woolpert should have noticed that.