Advantage/Disadvantage talk is making me nervous

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by RefRx
In Wa state the last couple of years there has been directions from the state office that A/D is not a consideration, that a "foul is a foul". I find that next to impossible to adhere to personally. Maybe to say that a situation does not have a direct impact on a play would be a way to address it. A newer official (and some older ones) never understand the implications of A/D and the game they call usually reflects tat lack of understanding. There are situations where contact may not put a player in a A/D situation but to ignore the contact would not be the wise choice. The contact on the pass mentioned above if ignored because the pass was completed could, and often does, lead to a retalition foul. The problem with the A/D is as Mark indicated in that it was carries over to violation situations by many officials where it does not apply

Maybe I am missing something here, but all contact is not a foul. The term advantage/disadvantage (not in those specific words) comes directly from the rulebook. So a "foul is a foul," you really have to explain that one to me. I agree that what is a foul at one level should be a foul at another level in principle, but that is all it is, principle. If there is contact and does not affect the play, you cannot by rule have a foul. You have to consider advantage disadvantage or you would have 20 fouls in the first 4 minutes of every game.

Peace