Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
Could you explain that a little more, please. I keep reading about "game interrupters" and how they're supposed to be such a bad thing, but I'm not really sure what a "game interrupter" really is. Doesn't every single whistle that any official blows, whether it was for a violation or a foul, interrupt the game? Is the concept that you should call fewer violations and fouls so as to not interrupt the game as much, with the goal of eventually reaching a point where you don't call anything and you never interupt the game?
|
No, every foul or whistle that is called is not a "game interrupter". A game can still
flow in spite of violations and fouls. Of course there can be no "game interrupters" and still be no
flow. I think that everyone would agree that a game that has a good
flow to it is more enjoyable and easier to officiate. To give you a definition of a game interrupter would be impossible - it really depends on the game and the call.
By rule, you could probably have and and-1 on almost every play inside. Do you call them all? Gosh, I hope not. Most of those would probably fall into the category of a game interrupter. Illegal contact that doesn't effect speed, rhythm and balance could be considered a game interrupter. Again, you'll notice all of these COULD be game interrupters. There is not a standard definition - game situation, type of foul, position on the floor, score and the flow of the game all go into what can make a foul a game interrupter.
tomegun, I think you are basically correct - more succinct than I was. Hope that makes the situation even more cloudy! LOL