Advantage/Disadvantage

[drinkeii]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Well I do have D1 colleagues. What you are saying is not what they are saying or doing. And you still haven't answered my questions about camps. What have you been told there?

What does a police chief or commissioner or sheriff have to do with how police officers enforce the law in certain precincts, cities, or counties? Is law enforcement done exactly the same everywhere you go? Is speeding enforced on Nevada interstates just as it is in Maryland. Are marijuana laws as strigently enforced in South Central LA as they are in Salt Lake City?

Whether you like it or not, your officiating philosophy is not what is accepted by the overwhelming majority of officials and supervisors. Assignors and supervisors trust the judgement of their officials, especially their top level officials. If an official feels contact should be passed on, the it should be passed on.

Why don't you tell us the real reason you started this thread? Give us the exact play you encountered (i'm thinking it occurred in a game you coached). You know what, maybe the official just blew that particular call. Maybe you just had a inexperienced official. Or maybe you just had a bad official. No matter what the case, the play is over and done with. We weren't there. We can't change the call.

Awful lot of assumptions in these last posts.

I have been a high school official for 6 years. I ran an IM sports program for 6 years as well, but have officiated hundreds of games outside this.

I started this thread because of a question I thought of related to how advantage appears to be called by basketball officials, vs how it is called in soccer, and the fact that many official say we have to apply it, even though the rules aren't nearly as clear on that point (mainly by not using the term "advantage") in basketball. It had nothing to do with a specific play or any game I've coached in or reffed, although elements were drawn from both experiences.

I don't expect to change anyones opinion. I simply do not understand how we can have a game with well-defined rules, and people choose not to enforce them consistently. That's all. I expect my partner to follow the rules, and am rather upset when he/she makes judgement calls which either are, or appear to be, in direct contraction to the rules. I get upset when my partner ignores an obvious hard foul, which I would get chewed out for calling because it is in their primary, and they said they passed on it because of... whatever.

If the advantage/disadvantage was as clear as you guys say, we would never have any kind of "and-1" play - if they score, why call the foul? You never would. Only if they missed.

I'm done - you guys do what you want - you will anyway, as you have stated. Maybe I'm in the minority. Might does not make right, nor is the majority always right. And the little backstabs ("I think this is what this is from..." or "He just does intramural stuff...") are neither appreciated nor appropriate. I am honestly trying to understand how otehr officials can justify ignoring what I (and other officials watching) feel are fouls, or just are obvious fouls or violations.

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.