[dave30]

Of course I wouldn't cheat, but I didn't state my point well enough. I talked to my buddy who is a college official and he kind of gave me some ideas.

He said that you are "within the context of the rule book" to call a foul on any contact that disrupts the rhythm or balance of a player.

Team A is completely dominant. They are able to play through minimal contact with no problem.

Team B simply cannot play. Any contact disrupts their rhythm or balance.

Therefore, unless Team A can play defense and steal the ball every single time with zero contact, then I am within the context of the rules to call a foul on any contact since Team B is unable to play through any minimal contact. All contact puts them at a severe disadvantage. So, a hand of the back, body contact on a steal, however minimal is a Foul.

Team A is able to play through minimal contact without it disrupting their rhythm or balance. In other words, they still are able to do what they want to do and go where they want to go.



Are you guys telling me that you would call the exact same foul against Team B as you would Team A when A is not affected by minimal contact and B is just completely knocked off balance? You would really have Team A shooting double bonus leading 84-0? Team B should get the benefit of calls because any contact at all disrupts anything they are trying to do.

It's called game management and "looking at the big picture". One team is not competitive and staying within the context of the rules, you are still able to call enough fouls to hopefully get the winning coach to back off a little.


Here is another example: If Team B is down 95-0 with a minute or so to play, and they throw the ball in bounds and the dribbler takes a couple of baby steps before dribbling.....and travels slightly.....would you really call travelling in that situation? Or , would you let it go?

The rulebook says.....call the travel.....common sense says to ignore it.