Quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Kinghorn
Why the big deal with semantics? Our job, after we call a foul, is to communicate what happened to the scorer. The coaches will generally watch this so they know what was called. Using a term like "illegal pick" tells everyone what they want to know. We call rebound fouls "pushes" when a player goes "over the back" of an opponent or we use an illegal use of hands signal when an defender "reaches in" and makes illegal contact with a ballhandler.
|
First of all, the scorer could give a fat rat's butt what the foul is. Therefore, we aren't communicating to the scorer what the foul is. In fact, most look away before you ever give the signal. We're communicating with the fans, players and coaches. That's why it's important to use the proper terminology.
I have never seen an "over the back" foul. It's not illegal for a player to go over another player's back to get a rebound. It is illegal to push a player from behind while trying to rebound the ball. It's not illegal for a player to reach in and attempt to steal a ball. It is illegal to make contact with the hand(s) when trying to make a steal.
Quote:
|
I am not advocating using all of these common terms when we report fouls, but I think that we need to effecively communicate with the people involved in the game. If an official uses the term "reach in" at the table, is that wrong?
|
Yes, because it's not a foul to reach in. When you do this, you perpetuate the myth. That myth is that if a player reaches in, he has committed a foul whether contact occurs or not.
Quote:
|
BTW, I generally do not verbalize what the foul was, I only give color, number and the signal, but that's just me.
|
Nor do I. But when you do, it's important to use the proper terminology. It's just as important as using the proper mechanic.