Quote:
Originally Posted by bas2456
I've heard this philosophy brought up quite a bit on the forum, and I was trying to apply it in my most recent games. I found myself most often applying it on rebounding action, when coaches are screaming for the "over the back" foul.
I found that if the rebounder secures the rebound without a problem, there's no reason to call a foul. Is this the right way to apply advantage/disadvantage?
Have you ever tried to explain advantag/disadvantage to a coach, and has it worked?
|
bas2456,
As you have already seen, the application of advantage/disadvantage leads to interpretation which leads to inconsistency in officiating. If you have any question about this view, simply read the posts that have been made in this thread.
Years ago, a clinician mentioned that there is no quicker way for an official to irritate a coach than to apply advantage/disadvantage and there is no quicker way to issue a technical foul than trying to explain that call to a coach.
For example, there are officials who will not call an obvious illegal dribble (such as when a point guard clearly gets his entire hand under the ball on a dribble) if there is no defensive pressure since "the player did not gain an advantage" with the illegal dribble since there were no defenders in close proximity. If you fail to make the call AND then try to explain it to the defensive coach, the words can cause a problem later on. The slope gets slippier when the point guard for the other team gets a breakaway lay-up later in the game and the same action happens -- the player clearly gets his hand completely under the ball -- on one of his last couple dribbles. As soon as the official makes this call, trouble lurks. Are you going to call this an illegal dribble, after all, there was no defender nearby?
In today's game -- especially varsity level -- officials MUST utilize advantage/disadvantage. Otherwise, most games would have no flow. While you need to apply it, I would not necessarily recommend discussing it that way with the coaches. I prefer terms such as "the player was able to play through the contact" or "the contact was incidental" You are, in essence applying advantage/disadvantage, you just aren't explaining that way to the coaches.