Quote:
Originally posted by jbduke
No, I'm not missing the point. I draw a distinction between the appropriateness of "over the back," and "offensive foul." The former is not a useful descriptor because of the difference between its denotation and connotation, and the respective relationships to the rulebook. In the case of the latter expression, however, no substantive conflict exists.
Some officials use the phrase "offensive foul," and when we do, we are intending to describe a play in which the offense committed a foul. That the phrase "offensive foul" does not appear in a Fed or NCAA rulebook does not mitigate against its usefulness as a descriptive term, and I fail to see why you feel that attempting to correct someone on this point is an efficient use of time.
That said, I am indeed convinced that you DO consider it an efficient use of your time, and I will now cease and desist all attempts to convince you otherwise.
|
JB:
You are missing the point. We, as officials, are held to a higher standard. As Fred Horgan, of Canada (Past President of IAABO and FIBA Technical Committee Member), officials are the keeper of the game. Just ask all of the basketball officials who have become OhioHSAA registered basketball officials by passing my basketball officiating class between 1990 and 1999. Just ask to all of the basketball officials who have attended rules/mechanics meetings that I have conducted as a rules interpreter over the years.
Lay people use non-rule based language. Officials are not lay people. When an official usesthe correct language it is more difficult for him to be accused of improperly applying the rules.
As I stated in my third post of this thread, Using the correct language leaves not doubt as to what actually happened in a particular play.
I guess it is my nature as a rules interpreter and member of several national basketball officiating committees to be an educator to expect my fellow officials to use the correct language.
MTD, Sr.