Quote:
|
Originally Posted by drinkeii
The problem is that the rules don't support this. I agree that not all contact is a foul. However, if we keep going to the traveling (violation) or out of bounds, as I brought up, they are completely black and white, and your choices to call or not call them based on your personal feelings about the level of the game are not consistent with the rules.
Real life - the rules are defined. They are supposed to be administered or enforced. Refs choose not to do this. This affects the game. Positive or negative? Most would say positive, but I feel this is a negative impact. I'd rather have a ref call everything than to pick and choose what they felt they wanted to call that particular game. How do I explain to the kids I coach, when I'm coaching "Well, that's the rule, but they're ignoring it today" - that creates a disadvantage for teams which do play within the rules.
|
In general, violations are black-and-white. A player either steps on the boundary line, or doesn't.
Fouls are much more grey. The official must judge not only that there was contact, but that the contact was illegal and caused a disadvantage (that might not be apparent immediately, even though the whistle should come fairly quickly).
Don't confuse the two.
I'm not sure it's much different in soccer (although I admit I know almost nothing about it). During a throw-in, if the player throws the ball without both feet on the grouond, it's an immediate violation. NO grey area; no judgement (other than on the facts) required. If a player is tackled and falls to the ground without the defender contacting the ball, then play on if the pass was already made that leads to a break-away (similar to your basketball example).
In general, it's unwise to attempt to bring the rules and philosophy of one game to another. The written words need to be interpreted according to the specific desires of that sport.