The "And 1"

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by lukealex

Of course I understand advantage/disadvantage, do you? I also agree with Nevada, but the first post implies a foul that should be called won't be called if the shot is made.

Yes, it could be the exact same contact.

You might be misreading the original post: see the "unless" clause.

I'm not sure what the poster means by "unnecessary" contact, but a charitable reading would use this to mark the distinction between obvious and borderline fouls.

That would make the OP consistent with the advice to call all obvious fouls (regardless of what happens to the shot), but leave the borderline fouls unless they disadvantage the shooter.

And, by "it couldn't be the same contact," I meant that the exact same contact in borderline fouls cannot both block the shot and allow it to go in. There's either disadvantage, or there isn't.

[JRutledge]

There is always going to be some contact in the game of basket. You cannot call everything a foul.

Peace

[Adam]

To me, if the contact makes the shot significantly more difficult, it's a foul whether the ball goes in or not. Frankly, I often don't know whether the shot falls or not (I pregame this with my partners) because after the whistle I'm watching the players. What constitutes "significant" is going to change with the level of play, and is for me to judge.

[lukealex]

A foul is a foul, but not all contact is a foul. The shot being made or missed should not determine if contact should be a foul

[SWMOzebra]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

To me, if the contact makes the shot significantly more difficult, it's a foul whether the ball goes in or not. Frankly, I often don't know whether the shot falls or not (I pregame this with my partners) because after the whistle I'm watching the players. What constitutes "significant" is going to change with the level of play, and is for me to judge.

Exact same philosophy as a newbie myself...and I've no called some beauties that may have been grounds for misdemeanor assaults. I never look up at the ball, I rely on the trail to tell me if the shot went in. Especially in very close and emotionally charged games, I think the lead should have his eyes on the players in the paint until he's ready to move tableside and report. Too much opportunity for shenanigans. Bottom line, more experienced officials than I have given this sage advise: judge the advanatage/disadvantage each time, regardless of score, foul counts, fan's reactions or coach's stupidity.

[blindzebra]

It's dangerous to have a black and white philosophy on "and 1's", or anything else for that matter.

To me a made basket is only a small part of advantage/disadvantage in these situations:

What if the game is getting close to that line and not calling pretty good contact, just because the ball went in, keeps it on that slide into the crapper?

I've seen plenty of cases where a routine lay up turns into a Sportscenter highlight because of contact, IMO, that is gaining an advantage and the made shot means nothing.

This call is like any other call and it requires getting a feel for what needs to be an and 1, and what can be passed on, I just wouldn't use the shot going in as my measuring stick.

[refnrev]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

There is always going to be some contact in the game of basket. You cannot call everything a foul.

Peace

_________________________
Basket? I miss Mr. Annoying Grammar Guy. Actually Rut, you can call everything. I had a partner two weeks ago who did. Needless to say, it was a horrible night!!!!!

As for the original post, call the fouls and let the ticky tack stuff go. If he's hacked and makes it he deserved the "and 1!"

[TimTaylor]

IMHO, a foul is a foul. If the contact is sufficient I'll call it and if I judge it incidental I won't - whether the attempt is successful or not.

And I really dislike the term "and 1" - undoubtedly coined by some announcer somewhere.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by TimTaylor

And I really dislike the term "and 1" - undoubtedly coined by some announcer somewhere.

Actually, I think that you probably can blame some veteran NBA official back in prehistoric times- back in the late 50's and 60's. It's been around for a while. I can remember watching NBA games live when I was a teenager and hearing veteran officials like Joe Gushue and Mendy Rudolph using the term on court.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I can remember ...when I was a teenager.

You must have taken really good notes.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

You must have taken really good notes.

And when I read 'em, I break out crying.

I missed the Sexual Revolution by that much!