Quote:
|
Originally Posted by M&M Guy
Jeff, sorry if I'm going to do some bandwagon-jumping here, but I'm going to have to agree with Jurassic on this one. The POE's are definitely part of the rules; they are not just "suggestions". And, given the fact our area (Illinois) uses NF rules and mechanics, I don't see any reason to not follow them. I don't agree with the logic of some of the rules, interpretations and mechanics, but I have to follow them anyway when doing a HS game. The only way I would consider something different is if I was told by Kurt Gibson or Harry Bone that in Illinois we will be doing it differently. Have you been told by either that two hands on a dribbler is not an automatic foul? If so, the rest of us need to know that, so that officials in the entire state can call it the same way.
|
I have never had a full out conversation with either about calling hand-checks specifically. I have never heard Harry (BTW it is Bohn, not Bone
) ever (and he is a supervisor for college) ever suggest that you should call a foul "automatically" for two hands on a dribbler. Actually I have heard him talk about letting certain things go or not calling something that is not necessary. And Kurt tends to not try to tell officials how to call the game as it relates to judgment calls. He even suggests many times that he is not an official and is not qualified to make those kinds of judgments.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by M&M Guy
This is one of the perfect examples of the problem of consistency. Perhaps you've been told by certain supervisors or "big dogs" in some of your conferences that two hands on a dribbler should not be an automatic foul, and that displacement or disadvantage should still be considered. After all, the big boys can play through someone touching them with two hands, right? If that's true, then those teams will be at a major disadvantage when they go play teams in areas that the officials follow the NF rules "by the book". And whose fault would that be? Both sets of officials would be calling the game as they've been told, but it will be different for the kids. So it will be the kids that suffer from the lack of consistency between areas. This is the problem with supervisors and officials bringing in their own philosophies into the game instead of following the rules and interpretations as written.
|
Are you suggesting that a foul should be called no matter what? The player is not moved, impeded, stopped in any way but a defender just touches a ball handler with two hands, we should have a foul?
I would suggest that is not what is good for the game. And that violates or contradicts other rules on incidental contact which requires some movement to be affected by the contact. Also Harry does not expect calls to not be there or teaches officials to "make it be there." And considering that the camp he runs with a Final Four official as well and he teaches the same things in the same camp, I would suggest that this is not going to be a required.
Also this claim that "consistency" across the area is silly. You are not going to have kids that do not play the same way the same style and expect consistency all over a state or a country. In our state I can tell you that the Chicago Catholic League does not play the same way as the Pike Country Conference. There are not the same athletes and definitely not the same expectation of the way the game is called. Forget what the officials or supervisors want. Definitely if you change the classes of competitors (now that we have this silly 4 class system) and the gender you are not going to get the same type of game. Consistency should only be the concern of officials working a particular game.
Peace