Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins
1) How "minimal" the contact was has very little to do whether it was a foul. If a player goes down, then the contact caused a disadvantage and should be a foul. You don't need to assume the contact was worse than you saw.
|
Understand this point. However, contact, followed by a player going down doesn't always mean that it should be a foul. It happens quite frequently that a defender attempts to draw a charge by exagerating the effect of contact. If the official sees the whole play clearly, we would have no call. My point was the same here. If I thought that the contact was minimal, and then the player goes down, you have to make an assumption. Either 1) the player went down on his/her own or exagerated the contact or 2) the contact was what caused the player to go down. In this case, I'm generally assuming option 2. In other cases (e.g. a block/charge situation), I might assume option 1.