Thread: mental dilemma!
View Single Post
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 25, 2002, 11:02pm
Ralph Stubenthal Ralph Stubenthal is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 149
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark Padgett
It's not your job to "level the playing field." Certain attributes are advantages in this sport; things such as speed, size, strength, shooting ability, smarts, etc. These attributes are to be rewarded when used properly, but are not to be penalized by cutting slack to a player because he may lack them. That's what you are doing when you make a 3 second call against a guy because he's big, and don't make the same call against another player because he's small.

If that's what the "intent" of the rule was, then the rule would read something like: "A 3 second count is not to be called against a player under 5'10" tall, a player who doesn't understand where he is on the court and/or a player who is so bad, that even if he is camped in the lane it would not be an advantage to his team."

Last time I looked, it didn't say that.
Mark, I tend to agree and always have called it on both types of players but I believe you misunderstood the situation. I didn't mean to give the impression that 1 team had a big guy who got a 3 second call every time he violated and the other team was given breaks all night. I simply was referencing 2 different scenarios with the intent of gaining other officials insight on how they call the game. I don't agree with your explanation in the quote above. To me, the intent of the rule is very important towards understanding the game. The last time I looked, I didn't see where the rule book gave a definitive and complete description of just when and when not to T a coach either. Some common sense and a feel for the game have to be important in all calls; if not, then just build a machine to call the game. It can enforce the letter of the law without regard for how the game is supposed to be played.
Reply With Quote