Possible Double Standard

[SmokeEater]

I am not saying that this is the case in every District. I had a parent come up to me the other day and thank me for a very good job officiating his sons game. I was surprised because his sons team was on the losing end. He then proceeded to tell me his view about a possible double standard in basketball. I guess I was intreged and let him continue. He said he noticed that many officials are very strict about hand checking and bumping on the perimeter players, yet tend to ignore blatent banging and bumping inthe post. He said he had been told that it is expected that some contact will be made in the paint. I thanked him for his comments and went home to ponder the whole situation. I wonder if that is really a problem? Hmmmmm, something to think about and discuss at an association meeting perhaps.

[jkjenning]

Originally posted by SmokeEater
He said he noticed that many officials are very strict about hand checking and bumping on the perimeter players, yet tend to ignore blatent banging and bumping inthe post.

The post is more crowded and congested, so you could expect that more non-foul contact would occur, and because of the congestion defining contact as a clear foul is more difficult. When you isolate a defender on the dribbler, not only is it easier to identify the foul - it is also obvious to everyone else.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by SmokeEater

I am not saying that this is the case in every District. I had a parent come up to me the other day and thank me for a very good job officiating his sons game. I was surprised because his sons team was on the losing end. He then proceeded to tell me his view about a possible double standard in basketball. I guess I was intreged and let him continue. He said he noticed that many officials are very strict about hand checking and bumping on the perimeter players, yet tend to ignore blatent banging and bumping inthe post. He said he had been told that it is expected that some contact will be made in the paint. I thanked him for his comments and went home to ponder the whole situation. I wonder if that is really a problem? Hmmmmm, something to think about and discuss at an association meeting perhaps.

Hmmm...did you point out to the parent that hand-checking has been a POE for several years and that's why it's called like that? (Hopefully he didn't know that post play has been a POE also!!)

Seriously though, the requirements for a foul in the post are displacement and dislodging...with several big bodies, you can have quite a bit of contact without displacement...whereas the requirements for hand-checking do not require as much contact.

[Junker]

A handcheck out front is usually more likely to cause a disadvantage than some pushing by post players off the ball. I tend to talk more to post players about their play. Out front there isn't alot of time for that so you have to use the whistle more.

[SmokeEater]

Thanks for all your replies so far. I didn't talk too much to this parent just listened. He was not complaining just pointing out something he noticed. He was a former player at the University level here. Anyway It is an interesting point of view and when you really think about hand checking, it is about displacement/inhibiting a players movement as well. I have really been assessing how I handle the play at both positions and it gives me something to think about this sumer.

[Raymond]

I was a post player during my days in the military. I used to have the same complaint when I was playing. But it's sometimes hard for non-officials to grasp the concept advantage/dis-advantage and all the other variables that might come into play when it comes to foul selection.

I learned as I got older to 1) adjust the physicality of my post play (offensively and defensively) to how the officials were calling the game and 2) never to lay a hand on those puny, little, fragile guards who would whine even when they got the call

I've gotten my revenge now that I'm a referee by making sure that any time a post player is getting double-teamed by a guard and a big man, that any fouls that I call go against the guards

[JRutledge]

There is no double standard. The rules require a certain type of contact at one part of the floor that they do not with another part of the floor. All rules sets have standards in one aspect of the game that do not apply in another. It is interesting that he might think that way, but that does not mean he has a real point either.

Peace

[SmokeEater]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

There is no double standard. The rules require a certain type of contact at one part of the floor that they do not with another part of the floor. All rules sets have standards in one aspect of the game that do not apply in another. It is interesting that he might think that way, but that does not mean he has a real point either.

Peace

Rules reference? Where does it say you can bang on a post and its legal?

If I push a player on the perimeter and its a foul then it is a foul if I push a player in the paint. If its called outside but not inside that could be perceived (and perception is some peoples reality) as a double standard.

[Jimgolf]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

There is no double standard. The rules require a certain type of contact at one part of the floor that they do not with another part of the floor.

I think that is the definition of a double standard - two different rules depending upon a circumstance.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SmokeEater

Rules reference? Where does it say you can bang on a post and its legal?

Where did I say anything about "bang on in the post?" I said that the rules in many parts of any sport allow for things in one aspect of the rules and not the same thing in another part.

Just read the hand checking rule (which only involves the ball). Then when you look at the screening rule, time and distance is a factor in whether contact is a foul or not a foul. Then look at LGP rules where there is no time and distance to be able to draw PC foul. Also the way to draw a foul on a PC foul is very different than what requires drawing a foul on a screen.

Originally Posted by SmokeEater

If I push a player on the perimeter and its a foul then it is a foul if I push a player in the paint. If its called outside but not inside that could be perceived (and perception is some peoples reality) as a double standard.

I agree that perception can be reality to some people. That does not mean it is reality. I can perceive UFOs exist; it does not make it true.

Peace

[SmokeEater]

Thanks for your insight and opinions. The rules you quote are indeed specific. I still am leaning toward the fact that if its a rule it has to be called EVERYWHERE on the court. I for one will be less lenient on the contact allowed by the posts players.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Jimgolf

I think that is the definition of a double standard - two different rules depending upon a circumstance.

The definition of a double standard is something being applied to two different groups or situations based on the same set of facts. A double standard is also considered unfair. I do not treat a rule that involves the ball handler and a rule that deals with a player without the ball as unfair. I guess you do have the right to your opinion, but not everyone has to agree with that opinion.

Peace

[rockyroad]

[QUOTE=SmokeEater] I still am leaning toward the fact that if its a rule it has to be called EVERYWHERE on the court. [ QUOTE]

And yet hand-checking, which in the OP was one of the things disgruntled dad brought up, can only involve the ball-handler...so you aren't going to start calling hand-checking when the post player (without the ball) is cutting across the key and the defender has his/her hand on the hip, are you??? Please don't...

[Jurassic Referee]

[QUOTE=rockyroad]

Originally Posted by SmokeEater

I still am leaning toward the fact that if its a rule it has to be called EVERYWHERE on the court. [ QUOTE]

And yet hand-checking, which in the OP was one of the things disgruntled dad brought up, can only involve the ball-handler...so you aren't going to start calling hand-checking when the post player (without the ball) is cutting across the key and the defender has his/her hand on the hip, are you??? Please don't...

Say what?

How about a post player pushing off a defender with a hand/elbow/arm to get to an entry pass or gain good position?

As I understand the concept, hand-checking principles apply to all 10 players on the floor- including the ball handler. We try to teach our officials to call the hand/elbow/arm if their actions slows, prevents, impedes or displaces an opponent from gaining an advantageous position legally. Of course, it was, is and always will be a judgement call.

Getting away from specific labels, I think that what we're basically talking about here is illegal contact that gains an unfair advantage. That should be addressed all over the floor. Note that I didn't say that it should be always called; it should be addressed.

JMVHMHBO......

[SmokeEater]

No and just so everyone is clear the parent was not disgruntled. He was calm and thankful for the game just played. He just wanted to share an opinion.

To answer your other question, no I will not call handchecking if the post is moving across the key and the defender has a hand on him. However if he is impeded by the use of said hand I will dang straight pay more attention and get the hold call more often (as an example only), or when the post is trying to post up and they are "fighting" for position I will have to look closer at who is instigating the contact.

Remember I didnt say it was this way everywhere it just is something to think about. Does a "push" or "hand check" get called sooner on the perimeter players then it would on a post?