Quote:
Originally posted by Robmoz
Don't call unless impacted the play? What about the lazy inbound that is made after a basket while the flow clearly has gone back down the court. Everyone in that end of the gym sees the violation, yet no impact on the "play", you let it go time and time again. Why, because you deemed it not necessary to the game? Puhleeeeeze, use judgement on judgement calls but call violations as they occur because THAT IS part of the game and I do not buy into the notion that such calls take away from the game. Do not start down a slippery slope of selective enforcement you will regret that you ever left your roots.
|
There's a key difference here, Rob. The original post describes a player on the arc with his toe on the line. It did not affect the play at all.
The lazy throw-in violation after the basket does affect the play. It has allowed them to get the ball in more quickly.
If you're not calling it, Rut's first response is probably best. "I didn't see it that way."
It looks to me like the question was posed to try to convince those who wouldn't make the call to do so, out of fear that the coach may have seen it. Rut's point is simple. We don't alter our judgment based on the coach's opinions.
No, whether his foot is on the line isn't necessarily a judgment call. But whether it warrants a violation is a judgment call.
Final advice, do what the assignors want. If they want this nit-picked, nit-pick it. If they want judgment, use it.