[Jim Dixon]

I can appreciate the points of view so far. Now let me throw another wrinkle into it.

What if you work in a conference where the philosophy is more one sided?

That is, what if the supervisor says "Benefit of the doubt goes to the defense. Call a player control foul.",

or

"Benefit of the doubt goes to the offense. Call a block."

There is this philosophy out there, and until there is strong enough justification for one or the other, there will probably continue to be inconsistency.

Thus, can anyone obliterate the aforementioned positions that favor the no-call, and instead, replace it with VERY strong justification for either the block or charge?

Put another way, based on the existing Case Book plays (NFHS) and Approved Rulings (NCAA), do you think that there is already some basis for placing the greater burden on the player in ball control?

I personally subscribe to the latter, but would like to see if others have similar beliefs?