[blindzebra]

Originally posted by theboys
Here's the problem I see with some of the logic expressed with A/D, and our simple case of the slap on the arm. Lets say both teams are in the 1-and-1. My star player passes to a teammate, and as he makes the pass, is slapped on the arm by the opponent's star player, who happens to have two fouls. The pass is completed successfully, but I, being the quiet and respectfully inquisitive coach I am, scream, "he was fouled!". As you run by, you tell me, "no advantage coach...by the way, sit down".

On the other end of the floor, the opposition makes a similar pass attempt. (You can see where I'm headed, can't you.) Our star player, who also has two fouls, makes a similarly poor defensive move, and slaps his man on the arm. But, because 1) his man isn't as strong, 2) his man isn't as good of a passer, or 3) no one makes a supreme effort to save the ball, we get the ball. Or, we think we do, until you call a 3rd foul on my star player. Same contact on both ends of the floor, different call by the ref. You call it A/D. I call it inconsistent. My star player, as he comes to sit on the bench for the remainder of the half, is confused. Fans go nuts.

I don't have a problem with judgment, as long as its consistently applied.

It WAS consistent.The same contact is not an issue,the RESULT of the contact is,the contact by your player HINDERED the opponent from normal offensive movement.4-19-1
of the rule book.

Why is it that coaches always take an apples to oranges
approach to consistency?Inconsistent application of advantage/disadvantage would have been no call-basket,no-call-steal,both going in your teams favor in your situation.