Originally Posted by drinkeii

1) I simply do not understand how we can have a game with well-defined rules, and people choose not to enforce them consistently.

2) Guess I have different judgements than some of you. I am a rules person - that's the way I am - you can't play a game without rules. No one can debate this. You can't change the rules every time you play - or rather, shouldn't. This is debatable - the need for rules isn't.

Originally Posted by drinkeii

But if the rules say some is and some isn't... the rules say what is and what isn't, and there is no judgement involved. What you wrote before the semicolon contradicts what follows it. Either the rules say what is and isn't, or the official gets to decide what is and what isn't. You can't have both.

Originally Posted by drinkeii

So you would not call this as a foul, even though the player ended up on the floor, maybe bleeding? You would say this is incidental, by the rules? Just a simple yes or no.

Originally Posted by drinkeii

If I have my hand on the hip of a dribbler, and I'm attempting to guide his motion, and do so, i'm fouling according to the rules. Do most refs call this as a hand check? No - most would look for more than a slight effect - applying that judgement. What if they shove?

Originally Posted by drinkeii

And we're ignoring things which are blank and white. There are officials who won't make a 3 seconds call, and are proud of that fact. Where in the rules does it say we should ignore that? It says when to and when not to call it. No judgement involved.

Originally Posted by drinkeii

In my original example (well, a few posts in) - a player has his legs taken out from under him. It is clearly a foul - B ran into A trying to steal the ball, interfere with a pass, etc - but he clearly initiated contact which was NOT incidental. A2 gets the pass and puts it in the basket. Do we call the original foul, or allow the basket to stand? Do the rules support ignoring fouls like that (or considering them an application of "advantage"), if the team as a whole benefits? It's a yes or no question.

Originally Posted by drinkeii

In soccer, (and yes, I know it is a different sport) - we acknowledge a foul - it was a foul, and we specifically noted it as such by applying advantage - and allow play to continue even though there was a clear foul. I'm saying - do we do the same thing in basketball, but not "acknowledge" the foul? You're saying it isn't a foul. I'm saying it is - do we ignore it in favor of the advantage gained by the team by completing the pass and making the basket, or call the foul?

Originally Posted by drinkeii

Which explains why we have such a messed up legal system. The law is the law - don't break it, and you shouldn't get in trouble - break it, and you should. Even exceptions should be (and usually are) codified, such as killing someone to keep from being killed not being as bad.

If we can't call everything, why have all those rules? Just throw out the ones that we shouldn't call.. oh wait - that's my whole premise - people do this, which affects the game, and shouldn't.

Originally Posted by deecee

this is an argument that has run in circles and has not moved an inch -- why do we keep humoring him?

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

First of all, you keep saying you started this because you had a question. I'd like to know what your actual question is. From all you've said it seems to be "why doesn't everybody else see things the way I do?"

Basketball, maybe more than any other sport, is a huge gray area. There is so much contact that must be judged so frequently. And the criteria for judging are more nebulous than in any other sport I have ever officiated or played. Bottom line, the only thing truly black and white about the rules of basketball are the colors of the ink and page in the rules book.

But even having said that, you refuse to acknowledge the truth of what is printed in the rule book. First of all: "A foul is an infraction of the rules which is charged and is penalized." See that part "charged and penalized"? That means, literally and plainly, that it isn't a foul unless we call it. Period.

Then there's this little gem: "A personal foul is a player foul which involves illegal contact with an opponent while the ball is live, which hinders an opponent from performing normal defensive and offensive movements..." Not only must there be illegal contact (as opposed to incidental contact), but there is a required judgment by the official as to whether the illegal contact actually hindered the opponent. Then there's "normal defensive and offensive movements." What does that mean? Well, we all think we know what it means, but it's never defined anywhere. Hmmm, so we're also left to judge what that means at the moment of contact.

Let's look at contact: "A player shall not: hold, push, charge, trip; nor impede the progress of an opponent by extending an arm, shoulder, hip or knee, or by bending the body into other than a normal position; nor use any rough tactics...." Please define, exactly, for me:

• hold
• push
• charge
• trip
• impede progress
• normal position
• rough tactics

Is it necessary to use the hands to hold? How about to push? Is it necessary for the opponent to be displaced on a "push" or is the mere act of pressing against the opponent a push?

And what are rough tactics? It's not defined. Surely you would agree that what's rough in a 5th grade game may be small beer in a men's rec. game.

And what about impeding progress? The same contact that will stop a 5th grader in his tracks might not slow down a HS varsity player. Even on the same team, what impedes a smaller player may not impede a larger player a bit.

When you get into the real language of the rules, there is very little that's black and white. Your assertion that it is black and white is misguided and apparently uninformed by actual, critical study of the rules.

But hey, you've got a great pissing match going here. Have at it. :D

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If you noticed some of us have stopped. http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...s/banghead.gif

Peace

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

First of all, you keep saying you started this because you had a question. I'd like to know what your actual question is. From all you've said it seems to be "why doesn't everybody else see things the way I do?"

Basketball, maybe more than any other sport, is a huge gray area. There is so much contact that must be judged so frequently. And the criteria for judging are more nebulous than in any other sport I have ever officiated or played. Bottom line, the only thing truly black and white about the rules of basketball are the colors of the ink and page in the rules book.

But even having said that, you refuse to acknowledge the truth of what is printed in the rule book. First of all: "A foul is an infraction of the rules which is charged and is penalized." See that part "charged and penalized"? That means, literally and plainly, that it isn't a foul unless we call it. Period.

Then there's this little gem: "A personal foul is a player foul which involves illegal contact with an opponent while the ball is live, which hinders an opponent from performing normal defensive and offensive movements..." Not only must there be illegal contact (as opposed to incidental contact), but there is a required judgment by the official as to whether the illegal contact actually hindered the opponent. Then there's "normal defensive and offensive movements." What does that mean? Well, we all think we know what it means, but it's never defined anywhere. Hmmm, so we're also left to judge what that means at the moment of contact.

Let's look at contact: "A player shall not: hold, push, charge, trip; nor impede the progress of an opponent by extending an arm, shoulder, hip or knee, or by bending the body into other than a normal position; nor use any rough tactics...." Please define, exactly, for me:

• hold
• push
• charge
• trip
• impede progress
• normal position
• rough tactics

Is it necessary to use the hands to hold? How about to push? Is it necessary for the opponent to be displaced on a "push" or is the mere act of pressing against the opponent a push?

And what are rough tactics? It's not defined. Surely you would agree that what's rough in a 5th grade game may be small beer in a men's rec. game.

And what about impeding progress? The same contact that will stop a 5th grader in his tracks might not slow down a HS varsity player. Even on the same team, what impedes a smaller player may not impede a larger player a bit.

When you get into the real language of the rules, there is very little that's black and white. Your assertion that it is black and white is misguided and apparently uninformed by actual, critical study of the rules.

But hey, you've got a great pissing match going here. Have at it. :D