READ MY POSTS. Do not read into them with your own philsophy.
 

That is not what I said. Stick to the original conversation. Not only is that a foul, that is probably and Intentional Foul and they are going to shot two and get the ball back. That is not what we are talking about.

Again, you really need to read MY posts. I have never said a foul call is affected by whether the shot goes in. But if the shooter is affected in his follow-thru or has to alter his shot because of the contact of the defender, I am calling a foul. And I do not think I even made a comment about a shot. But contact, just because there is contact is never a foul in my book. The severity of the contact is not a factor either. You could have very slight contact on an arm on a pass or shot and you have a foul if that contact affects the shot or pass. Whether the ball goes in the hoop for me is not a factor. It might help in my decision, but it is not the determining factor. Because if I feel a player was fouled, I have probably blown the whistle before the shot is completed.

Peace

Re: Re: All slaps are not created equal.
 

You seem to be missing the point.If a player is shoved to the floor you have an intentional or flagrant foul,and that has NOTHING to do with advantage/disadvantage.

Read 4-19-1:
A personal foul is a player foul which involves illegal contact with an opponent while the ball is live,which HINDERS an opponent from performing NORMAL offensive or defensive movements.I read that to mean that it may be illegal contact,BUT if it does not keep the offended player from normal play it is incidental contact and is not a foul.

By that standard if a player gets slapped prior to shooting or passing we SHOULD wait to see if they can complete a normal play.

As for,"Getting clocked after the ball goes in and before they return to the floor," that depends on if the defense
did something illegal to cause contact,if they did you have a foul.

The thing with advantage/disadvantage is that it doesn't just include the result of the play (completed pass), but also includes the positioning of the players. If A1 gets tripped by B1 while making a pass to a wide open A2, and A1 hits the floor, I've got a foul. However, if B1 just slaps his arm and the pass gets through *and* A1 is not displaced or put at any other disadvantage; there is no foul.

I've seen plenty of players get bumped with the lower body
getting past the defender that will lay out to get the pass off,so I'm not sure you can say that that contact put them at a disadvantage if they dove past the contact and hit the floor.

Now if you are talking about an intentional raising of the foot to trip the player,I can see an intentional or flagrant foul in that case.

Here's the problem I see with some of the logic expressed with A/D, and our simple case of the slap on the arm. Lets say both teams are in the 1-and-1. My star player passes to a teammate, and as he makes the pass, is slapped on the arm by the opponent's star player, who happens to have two fouls. The pass is completed successfully, but I, being the quiet and respectfully inquisitive coach I am, scream, "he was fouled!". As you run by, you tell me, "no advantage coach...by the way, sit down".

On the other end of the floor, the opposition makes a similar pass attempt. (You can see where I'm headed, can't you.) Our star player, who also has two fouls, makes a similarly poor defensive move, and slaps his man on the arm. But, because 1) his man isn't as strong, 2) his man isn't as good of a passer, or 3) no one makes a supreme effort to save the ball, we get the ball. Or, we think we do, until you call a 3rd foul on my star player. Same contact on both ends of the floor, different call by the ref. You call it A/D. I call it inconsistent. My star player, as he comes to sit on the bench for the remainder of the half, is confused. Fans go nuts.

I don't have a problem with judgment, as long as its consistently applied.

Coach, I'd like your opinion on this question. It's an honest question (honest :) ), and I'd just like to hear a coach's perspective.

In the scenario you outline, which would you really rather have after your player gets slapped? Would you rather have an easy lay-up, or the third foul on your opponent that gets you a 1-and-1?

Now change it slightly so that it's not the "star player" on either end of the floor. In that case, which one of the above choices would you rather have? 3rd foul on a scrub and a 1-and-1; or the easy lay-up?

Again, honest question. What are your thoughts? I'd be interested in other coaches' comments too.

It WAS consistent.The same contact is not an issue,the RESULT of the contact is,the contact by your player HINDERED the opponent from normal offensive movement.4-19-1
of the rule book.

Why is it that coaches always take an apples to oranges
approach to consistency?Inconsistent application of advantage/disadvantage would have been no call-basket,no-call-steal,both going in your teams favor in your situation.

Judgement is being consistently applied. In the first case the pass was completed so we play on. In the second case the pass was not completed due to illegal contact so we have a foul.

Now let's switch things around a bit. Your star player has 4 fouls and slaps an arm during an otherwise successful pass. You're going to be happy if we have a foul now?

Or let's say we use A/D and let this go. Your star is still in the game - you're happy, right? Now you have the ball, there's a slap on the arm & to be consistent we let that go too...and you're happy as your opponent picks up the ball & goes in for an easy layup. Right? I mean, we are being consistent.

For me, I have this "thing" about fairness. As long as its fair (or I perceive it as fair), and I truly mean fair, as opposed to "fair for me", I'm okay with it. If the reffing team is calling/not calling arm slaps the entire game, I can live with it. The thing is, if you're calling the slaps fouls on both ends, regardless of the outcome of the shot or pass, then I don't get mad at you for calling the foul on my star player. I get mad at my star player for being such an idiot when I just told him to play smart since he had four fouls.

But, if you're using a/d as has generally been described, and you don't call a foul, I don't think, "Boy, that official is smart. He knows how to use a/d wisely." I think, "Whew. Got away with one there." Then I yell at my star player anyway.

And, to answer Chuck's question...sort of...I'll lean on the wisdom of Dick Divenzio, who was one of the most basketball savvy people to grace God's green earth. He hated the comment, "smart foul". Because, as he said, few fouls are smart. Fouls make a coach alter his game plan, and ultimately give the opponent a scoring advantage. With enough fouls, the opponent doesn't even have to shoot the ball to get an opportunity to score. So, would I want the easy lay-up or the foul called? I think I would lean toward the foul. Because, even if the situation isn't a 1-and-1, I still have the ball.

Then we agree (except for the "I perceive it as fair" part of course).

Where's the problem again?

The rule book is about like the Bible, Two people read it you get two different ideas about the meanning of what is being said or ment . Rut can probable quote rules like a preacher does scripture. And as for my last few postings on the A/D subject, yes they are a little over the top. But I would have to say the problem I see with this whole A/D thing is the ability to stay consistant! Every coach I've talked to wants that most out of an crew of officials. We all have different styles about how we will call a game. Some will call it tight, some will "let them play". My problem is (and its my problem) if its a foul, its a foul. Again unless it was unintentional. The gray areas of this is what makes us all different in or style of reffing a game.

I guess I will never understand your point of view.
 

Why would A/D keep anyone from calling the game consistently? I am not understanding why contact that does not affect the play would be a problem? I agree that there might be people that take any philosophy too far, but what does that have to do with calling the game correctly? Maybe it is me, but if you do not use some of this philosophy where I live, you are not going to go very far. Because basketball is a contact sport and we have to decide what contact is going to be called and what is not. No different in football when I have to decide if that hold affected the play or that action is what it seems at my first glance.

Peace

I think if the word "incidental" was used when we say contact then, yes I to agree with most of what you are saying.

Basketball was never ment to be a contact sport. We can thank the NBA over the last 20 years for that!

Basketball IS a contact sport. Has nothing to do with the NBA.

Golf is a noncontact sport.

Golf is a sport?