Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BillyMac
The Tower Philosophy
The basic and fundamental responsibility of a basketball official, while officiating a contest, is to have the game proceed and played with as little interference as possible on the part of the official. This is not to say that he is not to blow the whistle when a rule has been violated; but it is one of not seeking ways to call infractions not intended by the spirit and intent of the rule.
The "Tower Philosophy" stated in another manner is as follows:
'It is not the intent that the rules shall be interpreted literally, rather they should be applied in relation to the effect which the action of the players has upon their opponents. If they are unfairly affected as a result of a violation of rules, then the transgressor shall be penalized. If there has been no appreciable effect upon the progress of the game, then the game shall not be interrupted. The act should be ignored. It is incidental and not vital. Realistically and practically, no violation has occurred.'
|
Left out a few things, didn't you?
For instance- "They miss the reality that the spirit and intent of the Tower Philosphy is the basis for making a sound and consistant judgement, one that is used in deciding to blow the whistle or not blow the whistle,
but NEVER to ignore an obvious infraction".
Here's the complete article, Bill, minus the...uh...editing:
Btw, fwiw, I got handed a copy of the Tower Philosophy at least 40 years ago.
http://www.fiba.com/asp_includes/dow...sp?file_id=370
I see that Jackie Loube also basically says that the Tower Philosophy is
not for officials just learning the game. It should only be used by experienced, capable officials that possess a
thorough knowledge of the rules of the game. Also please note that he only refers to advantage/disadvantage using the Tower Philosophy as it relates to physical contact,
not violations.