Quote:
Originally posted by zebraman
Chuck,
Nice post. I agree with it except for one tiny piece. Your sentence which reads, "What it does mean is that you watch the whole play and decide if either player was placed at an unfair disadvantage by any contact" is missing one tiny piece. I'll give a couple examples:
A1 goes up for a shot and gets bumped pretty hard by B1. Shot goes in. Referee calls a foul and counts the bucket. We'll shoot one. Was A1 disadvantaged by the contact? Probably not since he made the hoop. Is it a foul? Yep, we see lots of "and one" calls at all levels.
A1 gets a rebound and B1 lands on his back. A1 is able to maintain his balance. Referee calls a foul? Was A1 disadvantaged by the contact? No. Is it a foul? Yes, because if you don't call that foul your game could become rougher and rougher. Frustration may ensue leading to more and more contact. We all know that rough play is a POE.
So I understand your point and I agree, but there are also fouls that we correctly call which by definition do not put a player at a disadvantage. These "non-disadvantage fouls" need to be made for game management.
Z
|
There are other disadvantages other than the shot not going in. If a B player is allowed to contact the airborne shooter without penalty, the A players could be intimidated by the fact that they KNOW that they can't leave themselves vulnerable as an airborne shooter. THAT'S a disadvantage. We need to protect our airborne shooters, provided they aren't contacting someon with LGP.