Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
My only problem is that such statements are applied too broadly. I too typically pass on contact that follows a block...but only to a point. At some point, the contact becomes too substantial to not be a foul. Where that point lies is certainly a topic worthy of debate but such a line should and does exist.
To say a blocker shouldn't be held liable for any contact after a block is analagous to saying a shooter shouldn't be held liable for anycontact after the shot is released...no matter how hard. The NFHS and NCAA have different penalties for this situation but it is called if the conact is enough.
|
I agree. I cannot understand why officials are told that contact following a good block (or other "good" play) should be ignored.This is, IMHO, the devolution of the sport that has lead to the NBA really not being basketball - it is more of a game played and called for the benefit of the spectators. Don't call travels, don't call contact after good-looking plays, don't call fouls on superstars (but definitely call fouls people have against the superstars), etc. Why have any rules? The NBA, if this devolution continues, could end up playing games And-1 Mixtape style (which, I like - but isn't "basketball" by the rules, which is what the game itself is supposed to be).
This has worked its way down to the college level already - officials being told to ignore contact after a good block, and every three point shooter getting hit after the release of the ball, just to name a few (I know there is a difference between NFHS and NCAA in terms of what is considered an airborne shooter, but no one seems to ever call the non-shooting foul when a 3 point shooter releases than definitely gets fouled, even "after the shot" - and this happens all the time).
And it is working its way down to the high school level, with officials at camps being told to ignore contact after a good block.
This is a slippery slope...