|
Peter
I am all for a liberal calling of this "violation". I just can't see you warning a player based on an 8 second count, which is how this transpired (the first FT wasn't a violation). As I read it, you suggested making a warning for being close to a delay after the first FT, which I can't support because you have no reason to warn a player who is within the legal time limit. That could be how they always shoot free throws. You will now have them thinking that maybe they are taking too long, that their 8 seconds was actually 12 and they will get a violation if they do the same thing on the next FT. Then they rush their rhythm and lose their concentration, all based on a warning without cause.
I would agree that I have never seen this called, and i have seen some people take a long time. But I do see many refs counting, and I have always assumed that if they are counting, they must intend to call a violation if it occurs. I guess I can see a warning rather than a call early in the game, if that's the way the associations expect it to be done. I just think that you can call this kind of thing early, can ignore it late.
|