Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
Any more cliches we can throw in there?
Seriously, I don't like this way of saying it (personal preference) because an obvious foul is different to a fan that it is to a coach. It's different to a coach than it is a player. And officials have a different perspective than all of them. So "obvious foul" means nothing, in my opinion.
|
I understand what you're saying. I believe a lot of officials know what obvious contact is. Could we agree a player who is contacted in the head by a player who is swinging to block a shot, is an obvious foul? Or how about a player shooting a floater and the def. Player is swinging to block the shot and makes contact hard on his tricep nowhere near the ball? I, along with what I would think to be 98-99% of officals, would like to believe that we would deem these an "obvious" foul. Plays like these are the easy ones that could call themselves. The other "tweeners" are the plays that most are referring to.
Also in your list, I would like to disagree with the one that states something about a player playing through the illegal contact. If the contact is illegal it must be called a foul. If it is marginal or inconclusive then a no call can be substantiated. At the high levels there are players that are big enough to play through illegal contact but that doesn't mean I have the right to ignore it. I'm doing a disservice and penalizing that player who made a committment to hit the weight room so he could play through that contact to earn himself more and 1s. This job is truly an art and views vary but I would like to think we agree on 99.9% of plays that would be obvious.