Philosophy

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

You really don't understand the concepts of legal guarding position, do you?

We're talking about an offensive player going over the leg of a defender with LGP. We're not discussing the scenarios that you're trying to interject now.

You claimed that it is a foul on the defender always if the offensive player goes over the leg of a defender with LGP. Again, that is a ridiculous statement. If the defender has LGP, then the stance of his legs is also legal. That means that the one thing that you can't call, by rule, is a block. It's that simple.

By rule, huh? You always get me there. SPIRIT AND INTENT, SPIRIT AND INTENT! Can't be said enough. By sticking their leg out they are hoping you are going to call that incidental contact, and that is exactly what you are doing. I am a firm believer that it is not the intent of the rule that the player should get away with something like that just because the exact wording of the rule protects them.

P.S. If you would kindly read the bottom of my first post in this thread, I would greatly and ALWAYS appreciate it. Thank you.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

By rule, huh? You always get me there. SPIRIT AND INTENT, SPIRIT AND INTENT! Can't be said enough. By sticking their leg out they are hoping you are going to call that incidental contact, and that is exactly what you are doing. I am a firm believer that it is not the intent of the rule that the player should get away with something like that just because the exact wording of the rule protects them.

P.S. If you would kindly read the bottom of my first post in this thread, I would greatly and ALWAYS appreciate it. Thank you.

If a player sticks his leg out, he gives up LGP. You can all a block. If a player sticks his hips out, he waives (there you go, Juulie) his LGP, so you can call a block. In the OP, the player did not stick his legs out. He had his LGP established and moved his body away from the offensive player but did not move his legs. I've got a no call, and if everyone insists I call somthing, it's going to be PC.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

By rule, huh? You always get me there. SPIRIT AND INTENT, SPIRIT AND INTENT! Can't be said enough. By sticking their leg out they are hoping you are going to call that incidental contact, and that is exactly what you are doing. I am a firm believer that it is not the intent of the rule that the player should get away with something like that just because the exact wording of the rule protects them.

P.S. If you would kindly read the bottom of my first post in this thread, I would greatly and ALWAYS appreciate it. Thank you.

Sigh.....

Again, you really don't understand the concept of legal guarding position. I don't care what you say about the spirit and intent of the rule. The bottom line is that the rule book says that you are completely and totally wrong. And I know that you keep saying that you are a college and pro official too, but if you ever tried to call that nonsense in one of those games, you'd never do another one.

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Sigh.....

Again, you really don't understand the concept of legal guarding position. I don't care what you say about the spirit and intent of the rule. The bottom line is that the rule book says that you are completely and totally wrong. And I know that you keep saying that you are a college and pro official too, but if you ever tried to call that nonsense in one of those games, you'd never do another one.

Just to clarify to everyone, and so you will stop using and misleading everyone on the forum, I DO NOT WORK PRO BALL. I have worked it and plan on working it in the future, but am not working it at this very moment and if you will gladly point to me the post where I explicitly said that I will retract my statement right here and now.

[tomegun]

Even if you don't do pro ball, some of your comments are dubious for a college or experienced high school official.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

Just to clarify to everyone, and so you will stop using and misleading everyone on the forum, I DO NOT WORK PRO BALL. I have worked it and plan on working it in the future, but am not working it at this very moment and if you will gladly point to me the post where I explicitly said that I will retract my statement right here and now.

http://forum.officiating.com/showthr...194#post357194

Your quotes were:

- "It is hard to keep up when you ARE working three different rulesets. I know in the pros and college....."

- "You are still allowed to work anything you want if you work in the WNBA and the NBA D-League. Don't forget about semi-pro and pro-ams in the summer as well. I have to keep up with these rulesets as I work and will be working with all of these rulesets. I hope that one one day I will be able to narrow it down to two, and finally to one, but for now that is how it has to be".

You stated that you are working three rulesets. I just want to clarify that if you are, then you are wrong in your interpretation of LGP and how to make a block/charge call in three different rulesets too.

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

http://forum.officiating.com/showthr...194#post357194

Your quotes were:

- "It is hard to keep up when you ARE working three different rulesets. I know in the pros and college....."

- "You are still allowed to work anything you want if you work in the WNBA and the NBA D-League. Don't forget about semi-pro and pro-ams in the summer as well. I have to keep up with these rulesets as I work and will be working with all of these rulesets. I hope that one one day I will be able to narrow it down to two, and finally to one, but for now that is how it has to be".

You stated that you are working three rulesets. I just want to clarify that if you are, then you are wrong in your interpretation of LGP and how to make a block/charge call in three different rulesets too.

In response to the first quote, I was just saying that it IS hard when you are working 3 different rulesets. There has been times where I went from HS rules to ncaa, to pros within a weeks time frame.

In response to the 2nd, I should have stated it better. It should have said, "as I have worked and will be working with all of these rulesets".

In response to the 3rd. I was talking in future tense, meaning that at one point in time I will hopefully be working all 3 levels and have to juggle the 3, and narrow it down to 2, and then to 1.

I think I understand LGP just fine, but we will just have to agree to disagree.

Sorry for the previous misunderstanding.

[tomegun]

Is btaylor and tenesseeref the same person?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by tomegun

Is btaylor and tenesseeref the same person?

You mean is he working in the.....wait for it.....SEC?

[tomegun]

Rainmaker, I understand what you are saying. Also, I don't think it is ever too soon - or the level too low - to start doing and thinking about things the right way.
I often notice that the best officiated high school games occur when one or more of the officials is vilified for doing something that is right but not popular. Many officials don't want to do things that aren't popular and/or don't have the intestinal fortitude (JR) to make correct calls. IMO this is one cause for inconsistency in the high school game.
I did (or didn't depending on how you look at it) something last night that was correct, but didn't make a coach happy. I T'd the coach up after another play although he was upset about the original situation. One of my partners did something later that was blatantly inconsistent and the coach got upset and rightfully so. I apologized to the coach later for our inconsistency; he still earned the T and wasn't right in the first place. A little awareness from my partner would have resulted in a more consistent game. Not related to the OP, but oh well!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

In response to the first quote, I was just saying that it IS hard when you are working 3 different rulesets. There has been times where I went from HS rules to ncaa, to pros within a weeks time frame.

.

What level NCAA games are you working or did work? D1? D2? D3? NAIA? JC?

What pro leagues do you work or did work? WNBA? NBDL? CBA? ABA? Other?

Just wondering......

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

What pro leagues do you work or did work? WNBA? NBDL? CBA? ABA? Other?..

In btaylor's defense (not that he needs me from it), it's entirely possible to use the pro ruleset without being anywhere near an actual pro league. Around here (and in many parts of the country, from what I'm told), there is a "pro-am" league which is basically an men's adult league that has former small-time D1 players in it. They use the NBA rules and mechanics, but no way is it a "pro" league.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

By rule, huh? You always get me there. SPIRIT AND INTENT, SPIRIT AND INTENT! Can't be said enough. By sticking their leg out they are hoping you are going to call that incidental contact, and that is exactly what you are doing. I am a firm believer that it is not the intent of the rule that the player should get away with something like that just because the exact wording of the rule protects them.

P.S. If you would kindly read the bottom of my first post in this thread, I would greatly and ALWAYS appreciate it. Thank you.

First of all, where does the "exact wording of the rule" protect the defender, LGP or not, who "stick[s] their leg out"? It doesn't. That is a block, every time. That is different than the situation under discussion.

Second, I am a firm believer that a player whose play meets "the exact wording of the rule" is not "get[ting] away" with anything. He or she is playing perfectly legal basketball and no referee should apply personal interpretations, even under the guise of "SPIRIT AND INTENT," to invent fouls on perfectly legal plays.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

By rule, huh? You always get me there. SPIRIT AND INTENT, SPIRIT AND INTENT! Can't be said enough.

It can, and has, been said enough. One must understand the literal meaning of a rule before one can begin to make legitimate exceptions to that literal meaning.

Routine applications of the "letter" of a rule can be made without appealing to the rule's spirit. The vast majority of cases fall within the scope of routine applications. Thus, it is wise to learn the rules.

[Kelvin green]

Call a block on a player with LGP. No way! no How.

If a players is playing good defense we should never penalize it, when the player is playing marginal defense then they get called for the foul. If this player does not move the feet, and had LGP (no extensions out side of the frame... etc) It is most likely nothing or PC...