Quote:
Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle
Okay, JAR, see if you can follow me here...
Exactly which words, which phrases in the statement "The fifth foul should be good" imply anything about the first four fouls? Yes, the word "good" is a relative term, it implies a comparison. But the implied comparison is only between a good or bad fifth foul.
The statement you are criticizing does not, in fact, imply anything at all about the first four fouls. What you have chosen to infer from that statement, well that's your doing.
|
The fact that this thread repeatedly refers specifically to the fifth foul, as opposed to fouls in general, still indicates that the fifth may be considered to be worthy of different consideration from the first four.
Consider this. If a player picks up two quick fouls early in the game, the third foul now becomes the one that "better be a good one" if it happens soon afterward.
All this is further complicated when some fans/coaches/officials bring up the "star player" as part of the equation of what is or is not a "good foul."
Bottom line is that I see all this discussion as ripe to be misconstrued.
"Didja see on the officiating board? Those guys said they won't call the fifth foul on the star unless he draws blood! I knew something funny was going on."
Don't ask. Don't tell.