Quote:
Originally posted by tomegun
the term "game interrupter" is something that is relevant right now for basketball.
|
The problem with the term "game interrupter" is that
every foul,
every violation and
every time-out is a game interrupter. They stop the game. The problem is not game interrupters; the problem is
unnecessary game interrupters. If you talk about avoiding game interrupters, there are people who will take that to mean, you want to pass on as much as possible simply to keep the game moving. And that's a bad way to officiate.
Quote:
|
Constantly having "and one" plays in HS and/or college are game interrupters. It kills me when someone wants to constantly count the bucket but doesn't know when a player is gathering to shoot a foul should be a shooting foul all of the time.
|
Aren't these comments kind of at odds with one another? You hate the constant "and one" play, b/c it's a game interrupter, yet you also hate that people don't understand that there
should be an "and one" as long as the shooter has gathered the ball. If you teach people that, won't there be more of the "and one" plays you seem to hate?
And secondly,
why exactly is an "and one" play a game interrupter? If the shooter is disadvantaged on the drive, isn't that supposed to be a whistle? I agree that officials
at all levels award the "and one" when there sometimes is negligible disadvantage. But if the disadvantage is there, it's a call that needs to be made. Right?
Quote:
|
I got of track for a second there. I cannot picture a scenario in my mind where I will call anything contact a foul all of the time.
|
You're not trying very hard. How about a punch?