|
Wed Nov 17, 2004, 01:19pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Just thought that as long as we were going to go "old-school" we might as well go all-the-way! 
|
|
Wed Nov 17, 2004, 01:26pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
Wed Nov 17, 2004, 01:28pm
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Hey Coach...are you giving up Coaching? Are you going to officiate full-time...or split it w/ coaching? What level of officiating have you done in the past? Have you ever gotten a T...and if so, did you deserve it?
__________________
Dan Ivey Tri-City Sports Officials Asso. (TCSOA) Member since 1989 Richland, WA
|
|
Wed Nov 17, 2004, 01:38pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
In the past I officiated for 3 years--moved up to a full varsity HS schedule and got to work some 1st round playoff games at the HS level. I did a little small college JV stuff. I'm hoping to move into more collegiate work this time around, but after 11 years out, you have to start back at the starting line (rightly so.)! Yes--I've gotten T's before (some well deserved, some not so much). Some I got on purpose in an attempt to change momentum or the way a game was being officiated--most were the usual complaining about a call too much. I got more when I was younger (had more energy to argue back then). Haven't had one the past couple of years--maybe I'm losing my edge!
|
|
Wed Nov 17, 2004, 02:44pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Offensive Player OOB
Quote:
As it was explained to me, one rational for this rule change is to NOT give the defender special treatment. An offensive player with the ball can not step on the line and be considered in play. Why should a defender be given that right? If the offense is required to stay in bounds, the same should apply to the defense. I've had the same concerns as your association. I've been worried about the offensive player that takes advantage of this rule and clocks the defender. I believe we have recourse within the rules. I could call a double foul: blocking on the defender and a flagrant foul on the offender if I believe the offender intentional tried to hurt the defender. A flagrant foul by rule can be called for violent contact. However, I had better be able to sell this call as it will mean the offensive player is disqualified.
|
|
Wed Nov 17, 2004, 02:56pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Offensive Player OOB
Quote:
Thanks for your post. I've heard that argument as well. I'm not going to repeat what I've already posted earlier in this thread--I hope you can take the time to find some of my earlier scenarios/justifications for why I think this is a bad rule & needs to be changed. I've considered it for the past year & tried to see it from all three perspectives (player,coach,official). I like what some of the posters said about how they would/have handled it. I think the block/flagrant call is very extreme and not very likely to happen. If you've got the guts to eject a dribbler who just goes hard to the basket and "happens" to run over a defender--then you are a braver soul than any of the officials that I have seen. I think the FC/BC division line question exemplifies why this is a ludicrous rule. I haven't heard anyone say that a defender shouldn't be allowed to step on the division line and maintain legal guarding position. The penalty for the offense in this case is exactly the same as stepping on any other boundary. The bottom line to me is that Block/Charge is called (not necessarily by rule) based on the defender's ability to "center" his body, in proper defensive position, in front of the offensive player before the offensive player gets to that spot. In order for a defender to get properly "centered" on an offensive player's body, when near the boundary (or division line), he is likely to have to have a foot OOB. To me that's not an "unfair" advantage to a defender--it's simply allowing them to move to a position where they can appropriately guard the offensive player.
|
|
Wed Nov 17, 2004, 04:10pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Re: Offensive Player OOB
Quote:
1. "If you've got the guts to eject a dribbler who just goes hard to the basket and "happens" to run over a defender--then you are a braver soul than any of the officials that I have seen." I'm not a braver soul and in the scenario you gave I would not call a flagrant foul. The scenario I have in mind is when it is obvious to everyone that the offensive player was trying to hurt the defender. Just going hard to the basket is not enough. Seeing the defender's foot on the line, lowering his shoulder like a linebacker and giving it all he 's got is more what I was thinking about. 2. "I haven't heard anyone say that a defender shouldn't be allowed to step on the division line and maintain legal guarding position." That's because the division line is part of the playing area of the court. The sidelines/endlines are not. 3. "In order for a defender to get properly "centered" on an offensive player's body, when near the boundary (or division line), he is likely to have to have a foot OOB. To me that's not an "unfair" advantage to a defender--it's simply allowing them to move to a position where they can appropriately guard the offensive player." He doesn't "have" to have a foot out of bounds. He chose to have a foot out of bounds. He could have set up further in bounds and avoided the situation. Again, I don't believe the defender should be able to step out of bounds to cut off the sideline/baseline. If we allow that, then we are giving him/her more space to play in than we allow the offensive player. If we allow his/her foot to be touching the line, then why not allow his/her foot to be completely over the line. How far out of bounds are we going to give the defender? Are you going to allow the offensive player to go out of bounds to avoid the contact? No. Then why allow the defender to setup out of bounds to get the PC call? I guess we are just going to have to respectfully disagree on this one.
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
