Quote:
Originally posted by drinkeii
Quote:
Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser
Quote:
Originally posted by drinkeii
One major problem with this sport is the range of what is acceptable for calls when compared to the rules. Many officials choose not to call specific things because they disagree with the rules, or choose to ignore things in favor of game flow. I tend to be a very rules-oriented person, but there are people who very clearly, through their statements, choose not to call things because they disagree with the rule.
|
The only part in that I want to respond to is above. Forgive me if I over-snipped.
Game flow is an important part of what we do. My personal pet peeve involves marginal traveling calls or marginal fouls called that interrupt games. We are there to facilitate the game; we aren't gun-slingers out to nail every little thing we think might violate a particular rule.
I've seen a TON of this in subvarsity contests this season. Foul after foul after foul on contact that causes NO disadvantage at all. Travels called on ugly plays that clearly, by rule, aren't traveling violations. Ugh.
|
But in this case, you are stating that it is "ugly, but not a travel" - so therefore, there shoulnd't be a call - and this I agree with. And I understand, to a certain extent, advantage/disadvantage. But when you think about it, isn't it always to the fouled team's advantage to call a foul, because that puts them closer to the bonus, and that opponent closer to being out of the game? I mean, that is a more global (and less considered) advantage/disadvantage argument... and not commonly accepted as a reasonable interpretation - but isn't it one way to look at those fouls?
Besides... in Basketball, advantage/disadvantage is listed in the rules as a consideration. In soccer, it is actually part of the rules and required to be considered. In basketball, there is no clear statement in there that you should ignore a foul which does not generate a disadvantage. It does explain that somewhat - but nothing like soccer, where the rules say you must pass on calling a foul where there is an advantage to allow the fouled player to keep playing.
|
Advantage/disadvantage is not considered from an administrative standpoint. To me and to all the other varsity/college officials I work with, advantage/disadvantage means we don't stop the game on contact unless it's excessive or if, in our judgment the person (or sometimes the team) contacted is disadvantaged. We don't care about the bonus or the number of fouls on a player.
Coming to grips with this is what takes most officials from the subvarsity level to the varsity level. I've lived in 6 states and things are pretty much the same everywhere I've officiated.
The one thing I've read above that I think is completely incorrect is your quote: "that you should ignore a foul which does not generate a disadvantage". If there is no disadvantage or if the contact isn't excessive, there's no foul. There can be contact without a foul. That is in the rulebook.