Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tomegun
This is my opinion of this post: it rationalizes ball-watching and virtually gives license for an official to continue doing this. I guess it is hard to accurately describe the travel play, but it was directly inside the lane opposite where the C was. It also wasn't an overload and the C had to look past at least two competitive matchups to call this. I don't even remember if one of the players he looked past were moving to become secondary defenders, but it is a possibility and he would have been clueless. Let's think about this people, he called traveling which means he didn't just have awareness of where the ball was he was focusing on the ball. The play started outside the lane on the other side of the court and the travel occured right inside the lane. So it isn't a big deal to focus on a play that started on the opposite side of the court when you have matchups in your primary? Like Rocy said, he is a ball-watcher plain and simple.
I will pregame like I normally do and stress what I normally stress. He knows its coming and I know its coming. It is up to him to do what he feels is best for the game. BTW, this is one of those officials who complains about not getting playoff games, etc. I wonder why.
|
Sounds like he had a couple competitive matchups, and in that instance it's hard to see why he'd have been looking there. I'll take your word on it.
That doesn't change my opinion that there are times C can see right through the lane and see a travel (or other violations), but the more you describe this the more it sounds his attention should have been in his primary...