Quote:
|
Originally Posted by icallfouls
So let me get this straight. Some people here are saying on block/charge plays (bang-bang) that if the first one is a block, then the sceond one should also be a block?
|
I'm not sure if I'm counted on this side of the argument, but I would expand the explanation to say if in my partner's judgement, that first particular play was a block, and I get the same play in front of me later, my judgement should also consider that same play a block. Iow, the crew should have the same judgement on all plays.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by icallfouls
I rarely say this, but this time I agree with Jurassic.
|
Maybe you should look at his posts a little closer, you might agree with him more than just rarely.
I do agree with his simple logic in that all plays should be called on their own merit. However, simply saying "a block on one end will be a block on the other end" is also overly simplistic. Some people go into a game with differing levels of judgement. I might feel I can pass on certain contact because I didn't feel it caused an advantage, but my partner(s) might feel that same contact did cause an advantage, and therefore call the foul. I pass on the play at one end, my partner calls a foul on that same contact on the other end, and the result is an inconsistent crew. Whichever one of us is "correct", the other(s) should change their judgement to match. It can also be applied to block/charge calls, in that if we all know the rules and apply them them correctly, how could you not agree that a "block on one end is a block on the other"? If we as a crew don't all follow the same guidelines, I might call a charge on player who knocks over a defender who has LGP, but has one foot in the air, while my partner might feel having that one foot in the air does not constitute LGP. One end of the floor is a charge, the other end of the floor the same play is a block, and we have an inconsistent crew.
Does that make more sense?