Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
Originally posted by Stat-Man
Quote:
Originally posted by Larks
I use it sometimes. Depends on the situation. And, my 6' is more like 4 and a half.
|
Seeing that's not the letter or the spirit of the NFHS rule, I certinaly wouldn't be happy if I was a coach and this shorter distance was obvious (such as by the mid court or free throw circles). It would also likely garner a lower officials rating, also.
|
Why doesn't it meet the spirit and intent of the closely-guarded rule? Do you really believe that a defender passively standing 6 feet away from a dribbler and making absolutely no attempt to play any kinda real defense is closely-guarding anything?
Six feet might meet the letter of the rule, but it's debatable whether it really meets the spirit and intent of the closely-guarded rule.
I also think that an official calling the 6' distance by rote on a passive defender is gonna get a much lower rating from an evaluator than the official who's calling it more according to the intensity of the defense being played. To use one on the modern buzz words, imo it's a game interruptor to call it the way that you're suggesting.
And who cares what coaches think anyway? We don't call games to please coaches- that's impossible to do anyway. As long as this play is called consistently and the same at both ends, coaches have got no b!tch at all imo.
|
Who said anything about a passive defender?
If there is a defender in a guarding stance within 6', the count should be on. We should not wait until 4.5'.