|
|||
Quote:
And on that issue, the rules state very clearly what a hand check is, and near the end of the rulebook, it talks about how it is always a foul to have hands on the dribbler - even "touching" (sizing up, i believe it is called) is illegal. Why have something that the rules say is illegal, but you are told not to call? There is quite a contradiction there.
__________________
David A. Rinke II Last edited by drinkeii; Wed Feb 21, 2007 at 01:36pm. |
|
|||
Quote:
Besides - No one has addressed the situation I posted near the bottom of page 1 - the one where the kids legs were taken out, but the pass went to a teammate who scored. Advantage or foul?
__________________
David A. Rinke II |
|
|||
Quote:
It's not black-and-white.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR |
|
|||
Quote:
Also I cannot speak for what soccer does and how the rules are written. It might be that soccer has an entire section on this issue. I agree basketball does not, have a lot written about this, but it is covered. Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble." ----------------------------------------------------------- Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010) |
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners. |
|
|||
Quote:
How can you have a rule that says "sometimes call it, sometimes don't"? This is more a case of you deciding whether to apply the rule, or whether to just ignore it. The rules are relatively black and white. The interpretations add some grey space, and the refs themselves muddy the waters even more with personal feelings, what kind of a game they're willing to call, the level of the players (um - don't remember there being anything in the rules changing them based on the level of play, by age or by skill), etc. I guess I see it more like a card game. I don't think anyone would agree that just because I feel like it today, I'm going to allow people in blackjack to count a 2 as 5, or go over 21 without busting. The rules define what you can and cannot do. As officials, we are there to keep the players safe and administer the rules. To pick and choose which rules we want to enforce on a particular day, or how we want to enforce them, makes it less of basketball and more "me-sketball". I don't remember seeing anything in the rules allowing officials to just decide what to call and what not to. There are some areas where we are asked to judge. We're not asked to judge things like 3 seconds - we're asked to call them. We're not asked to judge whether a bear hug from behind is intentional - we're asked to call it intentional. We are asked to judge some things - but some things we're not, and people just do. I guess it comes down to - if we have rules, why don't we just follow them and be done with it?
__________________
David A. Rinke II |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
So in this case, you'd call it every time, even if there was no bonus, and the team that was just fouled (and made the basket) would have been up one with the basket with no time left on the clock? (but now they lose?) What about with lots of time and a big score differential? Comes back to "How can you call it different at different points in the game?" - the rules either say to call it ot not to. That's what I'm asking. Do the rules support a call which is advantageous to the team, but not to the player? (Obviously, the player was fouled, but it was to the team's advantage to keep playing - this is the situation). Some people call this game management - i feel it is an excuse not to call things because you don't want to call them, for whatever reason.
__________________
David A. Rinke II |
|
|||
Perhaps this is where I fall short. If I see a foul, I call it. I am not concerned with what might be if I dont. In your previous case, if the foul is not called perhaps A2 misses the layup or is fouled in the process of the layup. There are alot of what ifs.... If it is a foul, call it. If this is your point, good. But there are judgement calls that must be made by the official at that split second in an attempt to uphold the "intent" of the rules and the rules themselves. I believe most will do their best to be "consistent" throughout the game and not be concerned with score, etc. Officials are the only impartial people at the game.
|
|
|||
Quote:
So what exactly are you hoping to gain from this conversation? Are you interested in other people's philosophies or do you just want to argue?
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR |
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners. |
|
|||
SECTION 27 INCIDENTAL CONTACT
Incidental contact is contact with an opponent which is permitted and which does not constitute a foul. ART. 1 . . . The mere fact that contact occurs does not constitute a foul. When 10 players are moving rapidly in a limited area, some contact is certain to occur. ART. 2 . . . Contact which occurs unintentionally in an effort by an opponent to reach a loose ball, or contact which may result when opponents are in equally favorable positions to perform normal defensive or offensive movements, should not be considered illegal, even though the contact may be severe. ART. 3 . . . Similarly, contact which does not hinder the opponent from participating in normal defensive or offensive movements should be considered incidental. ART. 4 . . . A player who is screened within his/her visual field is expected to avoid contact with the screener by stopping or going around the screener. In cases of screens outside the visual field, the opponent may make inadvertent contact with the screener, and such contact is to be ruled incidental contact, provided the screener is not displaced if he/she has the ball. ART. 5 . . . If, however, a player approaches an opponent from behind or from a position from which he/she has no reasonable chance to play the ball without making contact with the opponent, the responsibility is on the player in the unfavorable position. The key word is hinder...if A1 can make the pass for the lay up, then the contact didn't hinder A1, so it isn't a foul, it is incidental contact. There is your advantage/disadvantage in the rule book. |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Advantage Disadvantage, Etc. | BillyMac | Basketball | 16 | Thu Feb 22, 2007 03:07pm |
Help me with advantage/disadvantage | lmeadski | Basketball | 21 | Thu Feb 16, 2006 03:22pm |
Advantage/Disadvantage is over rated | Hartsy | Basketball | 31 | Thu Dec 23, 2004 11:37am |
Tower Philosophy (Advantage-Disadvantage) | eckert | Basketball | 39 | Thu Feb 13, 2003 04:55am |
Advantage/Disadvantage | rainmaker | Basketball | 21 | Thu Jul 13, 2000 05:50pm |