5 seconds closely guarded

[ilyazhito]

I agree. That is why the philosophy of not calling stuff in a blowout makes no sense, especially when the call is obvious, like a 5-second count. Maybe the bench warmer was the one playing good defense to force the closely guarded violation, and (s)he needs rewarded for that good play.

[SNIPERBBB]

Thread necromancy also makes no sense.

[ilyazhito]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

Thread necromancy also makes no sense.

How is that relevant to anything? Maybe people have valid new thoughts about an older topic (closely guarded counts and the inconsistent enforcement thereof in NFHS rules).

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

How is that relevant to anything? Maybe people have valid new thoughts about an older topic (closely guarded counts and the inconsistent enforcement thereof in NFHS rules).

That happens once out of every 25 times an old thread is resurrected. Starts a new thread in that instance.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

I agree. That is why the philosophy of not calling stuff in a blowout makes no sense, especially when the call is obvious, like a 5-second count. Maybe the bench warmer was the one playing good defense to force the closely guarded violation, and (s)he needs rewarded for that good play.

There's a middle ground here, of course. I might pass on a travel I would've called earlier because the players in the game just aren't that skilled. Especially at smaller schools, there's a big drop off between the starters and the end of the bench.

Closely guarded? Yeah, I might wait an extra beat or two to start my count. Then again, I'm not very aggressive in starting that count in the first place, mainly cause I don't want to have a lot of 1 counts.

As for Bob's comments -- yes, that's right. Don't bump old threads -- if there's something there you want to talk about, quote it in a new thread.