Mick is a 100% right on this one. Many officials are taught about "interupters" and do not understand that principle very well. I agree, you should only wait to see if the shot was a struggle to put up. Some players are just stronger then some defenders and contact might not affect them as much, especially if they go up strong. It is not different than waiting to see if that push out front affected the dribbler before he/she makes a great pass for a lay up. The play is dead before you blow the whistle, I think waiting a half a second is not that bad.
Quote:
Originally posted by mick
Quote:
Originally posted by rocky
Do we have a bad habit of delaying the call of a foul just to see if the shot goes in or not. As a coach I see alot of officials waiting to call a foul only if the shot does not go in. Most officials tell me they don't want to interrupt the flow of the game. Is this a trend or just poor officiating? It really stands out when the ball hangs on the rim for a second then falls off as a miss- then suddenly a whistle---- My call is poor officiating? what does everyone else think.
|
Coach Rocky
That flow interupter was emphasized at many camps this year and if the delay really stands out, I would guess that the official who "waited" was still working that mechanic into his game.
If the shooter was really hammered and fought to put up the shot it will be called whether the ball is in, or out, but on a "shooter-got-bumped-a-little" call, the official may wait a bit to determine the effect of the touch, in my opinion.
mick
|