Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BillyMac
Jurassic Referee:
In summary, my reliable sources include our local intepreter, our state interpreter, the chairman of the education committee of the international organization, and the National Federation of High Schools Rule Book.
"A very simple question for you", Jurassic Referee: Why will you not "back up" your statement that “advantage/disadvantage was never meant to apply to violations” (June 14, 2006) and that the Tower Philosophy, advantage disadvantage, or the spirit and intent of the rules pertain only to “physical contact” (fouls) with reliable sources? "Why are you ducking answering it?"
|
That's all I wanted to know, Billy. You have now confirmed that the
official IAABO philosophy is that
all violations, such as traveling, palming, over-and-back, kicking the ball, free-throw violations, out-of-bounds, three seconds, ten seconds, 5-seconds, BI, goal tending, etc. should be called by advantage/disadvantage principles. Correct? As I said, that's all I wanted to know in the first place, Billy- where IAABO
officially stood as an organization in it's interpretation of the Tower Philosophy.
Now....I disagree completely and vehemently with this IAABO philosophy. My own personal opinion is that violations were never intended to be called as per the Tower Philosophy, and that advantage/disadvantage
generally does
NOT apply to violations. Note that is my
opinion. Iow, I don't agree with the official IAABO
opinion that you have cited. Please note that is all your(IAABO's) take on this is also-- just your- IAABO's- opinion. Neither of us can back up anything iow, and we never could, because all we're talking about here is basically just a difference of opinion.
I just don't think that it was ever intended by the rules makers for violations such as traveling and palming to be ignored. That is my own personal opinion. I'm not talking about something that might be
arguably a violation or not; I'm talking about an obvious palm or travel violation that an official just decides to ignore. Yes, 3-seconds certainly has historically been called along advantage/disadvantage guidelines. Most coaches will recognize that. Most coaches, however, won't recognize that it's OK to ignore an obvious traveling or palming violation by their opponent. If you ignore it if their team committed the violation- yes, that's OK. If their opponent did- no, that ain't OK. I also agree that, under certain circumstances( out-of-sight game, etc.), an official may choose to ignore some borderline stuff that might include an actual violation of a certain kind. Imo though, any obvious violation should
never be ignored. Also, some particular violations(OOB, backcourt, obvious FT) should also never be ignored. If there was any doubt in the first place whether there was a violation or not, then we shouldn't be calling it anyway. If it's obvious, it's gotta be called with no exceptions. It is also my opinion that when to ignore something that happens on the court is a skill that is acquired by good officials through experience and that skill
can't be taught- it must be learned. And some officials never learn it, even though they may try to use it in a game.
Obviously, we disagree and obviously we always will. It's a waste of time debating this further. Just let me tell you though that I am personally very disappointed that an organization such as IAABO is training it's officials to ignore certain rules. I was an IAABO member for many years, and I
had a lot of respect for that organization. As I said, that's just my personal opinion though. And my personal opinion really means squat in the grand scope of basketball officiating. Or anything else, for that matter.
Thank goodness though that IAABO's personal opinion basically also means squat to everybody but it's members too.
Btw, your reliable sources listed above
doesn't include the NFHS rule book. You're giving
your interpretion of the FED philosophy. My interpretation differs. Your reliable sources include your IAABO members only, and basically your reliable sources are as reliable as I am, or anyone else who wants to formulate their
own opinion on this also.
Chuck? MTD Sr.? Have you guys got any thoughts on this from a personal or IAABO standpoint?