Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac
No one, or not many?
I believe that JRutledge works, or has worked, in at least two different states, but has JRutledge observed officials here in my little corner of Connecticut?
Back in 2012-13 and 2014-15 when the NFHS made this a priority, my local board made this a priority.
I actually remember sitting there and saying to myself, "This will be a flash in the pan. No way this will survive the test of time".
I was wrong. Probably because coaches like it that way. Consistency is the key.
If coaches had pushed back over the years, the NFHS's attempt to eliminate almost all handchecks would have been long forgotten here in my local area, and we would probably be back to advantage/disadvantage.
|
You are kind of missing the point. Yes, it is technically a foul if there is constant touching. Yes, the rules prohibit there to be constantly touching a player with a forearm. But there are not many officials that are calling it that explicit and that is in the multiple places I officiate. Again the NCAA is much more strict on that and we still message the rule when we can at that level. There is a video out every week during the season highlighting 10-1-4 fouls (where the NF rule came from) and even in practice, it is hard to find someone call this specific play mentioned as a foul without some movement or stopping of the ball handler here. And when you call something like this, it does not necessarily go over well either. And I am sorry I do not use coaches as the gauge for anything, because they want any touching to be a foul when clearly a defender has not placed or extended their arms on a ball handler. Now it is much more accepted to make this foul call, but the play you showed it is hard to see how much if any contact the defender is making for much of the video. It looks like a handchecking foul, but is it really a handchecking foul?
This is why during plays like this I say, "Hands, hands, hands, hands" even before they touch the player so they are aware of the possibility of what I am seeing. Also, there is an interpretation where I live about the "hot stove" touch in which you are allowed one touch of the ball handler and then have to remove that arm immediately and it not be a foul. It does look like he touches the dribbler near the endline and the rest is hard to see. That is why for me if the angle is at issue, I need to see some RSBQ be influenced. If there is no "open look" by me which we rarely have in this video, then I feel more confident to make this call. Just like the shoulder video, we cannot see if there is contact even if the ball handler looks like he created contact. Call things you see, not what it "looks like."
Peace