Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
Originally posted by rainmaker
Quote:
Originally posted by gordon30307
Quote:
|
Originally posted by rainmaker
|
I had a game once where the ending score was something like 66-5. The winning team was still pressing in the fourth quarter. They also developed a bad case of the travels.
|
When games get out of hand and the winning team is still pressing it's funny but suddenly more fouls are called on the winning team when they press and they suddenly disappear when they stop. Don't know why that is.
|
It's easy to explain -- even coaches get it although they don't always like it. It's simple advantage/disadvantage. "Coach, when your team is so much better than the other team, any contact at all gives you a tremendous advantage. So if it's illegal contact, I've got to call it. On the other hand, when the other team contacts you, they get no advantage at all. It's gotta be a real hack or slam before I call it." That's the way it is in a mis-match. [/B]
|
Jmo, but I completely disagree with that whole concept, and I always have. It's not our job to impose our own personal values or beliefs into a ballgame. It's also not part of our job to become judge and jury to pass our own personal judgement on a team, and then become the executioner too. It is our job to call the game fairly and evenly, and keep it under control. What you're doing can, in no way imo, be called officiating a game fairly and evenly. Let the people who run a league decide what they think is fair or not. That's why running clocks, for example, get introduced into the rules. It's their job to make the rules; it's our job to call the rules, even the ones we don't like. If you want to loosen up or tighten up on the contact--fine- but loosen up or tighten up at both ends, not just against one team. Again, jmo. [/B][/QUOTE]
I agree with you to a certain point, but I do think the a/d thing can be reasonably carried out to this extreme. It's very true that we are supposed to keep a game fair, but that doesn't include robotically calling this much contact a foul and that much contact not a foul. It includes judgment as to whether a certain amount of contact creates an illegal disadvantage. WHen a team is very much better than it's opponent, it's much easier to create an advantage that is illegal if it involves illegal contact. I've never made anything up, at all. If the winning team plays clean, I've got nothing, and I"m not calling breathing fouls. If the losing team can't make their shots over legal defense, they get no "help" from me. But especially for travelling and contact, they also get a lot more "consideration" and holding the whistle to see if they gain any advantage. If they're poor enough players to lose in a shutout, they probably can't even foul well!