The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 24, 2008, 08:59am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: In a little pink house
Posts: 5,289
Quote:
Originally Posted by chartrusepengui
using or not using the phrase "no call" is paramount to using or not using the hands spread signal to indicate not closely guarded.
Tantamount, even.
__________________
"It is not enough to do your best; you must know what to do, and then do your best." - W. Edwards Deming
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 24, 2008, 01:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 44
agree to disagree?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
With all due respect gentlemen, you are all making my point. If you decide not to put air in the whistle, you are telling everyone that nothing illegal has happened. One of the first things I learned as as basketball official is that you have nothing (meaning the play was legal) until you have something (meaning the play was illegal) and that you have something you put air in the whistle.
Mark, you never touch on the term advantage. Thats where the idea of a 'no call' comes from. Just because there is no whistle on a play, does not mean there was no illegal action. It does mean (in cases) that the illegal action did not affect the play.

Situations:
  • Whistle on an illegal action deemed to affect play = a good call
  • Whistle on a legal play = a bad call
  • No whistle on an illegal action deemed to not affect play = a good no call
  • No whistle on an illegal play deemed to affect play = a bad no call
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 24, 2008, 01:48pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemer
Mark, you never touch on the term advantage. Thats where the idea of a 'no call' comes from. Just because there is no whistle on a play, does not mean there was no illegal action. It does mean (in cases) that the illegal action did not affect the play.

Situations:
  • Whistle on an illegal action deemed to affect play = a good call
  • Whistle on a legal play = a bad call
  • No whistle on an illegal action deemed to not affect play = a good no call
  • No whistle on an illegal play deemed to affect play = a bad no call
I will take issue with only what you are saying. Contact is not illegal until it creates and advantage. So if you have illegal contact that needs to be called. That involves a lot of judgment.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 24, 2008, 02:06pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 44
hold up, shooter

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
I will take issue with only what you are saying. Contact is not illegal until it creates and advantage. So if you have illegal contact that needs to be called. That involves a lot of judgment.
No way Jose, disagreed. Your telling me that if I push a player on purpose after a whistle, that is NOT illegal because I didn't gain an advantage? It is illegal, and no advantage was had.
Also, if I set a screen in which I hold you, or push you off your position, and the ball handler that you are guarding is 10 feet away standing there, running out the clock, I say thats illegal. Depending on the severity I would/wouldn't call it. But no advantage is gained. Illegal = no advantage necessary.

I'd love to hear others opinions on this, I still say there is such thing as illegal contact without creating or losing an advantage. The two things are not one in the same, and thats why the term 'no call' is appropriate. I contend that if what JRutledge says is true, then the term 'no call' is inappropriate.
But hey, me being wrong isn't be a first, and you can bet your mortgage it won't be the last.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 24, 2008, 02:15pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemer
No way Jose, disagreed. Your telling me that if I push a player on purpose after a whistle, that is NOT illegal because I didn't gain an advantage? It is illegal, and no advantage was had.
Yes. And if you do not believe me, read 4-27.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemer
Also, if I set a screen in which I hold you, or push you off your position, and the ball handler that you are guarding is 10 feet away standing there, running out the clock, I say thats illegal. Depending on the severity I would/wouldn't call it. But no advantage is gained. Illegal = no advantage necessary.
Well based on what you just said, I would contend that you could have an advantage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemer
I'd love to hear others opinions on this, I still say there is such thing as illegal contact without creating or losing an advantage. The two things are not one in the same, and thats why the term 'no call' is appropriate. I contend that if what JRutledge says is true, then the term 'no call' is inappropriate.
But hey, me being wrong isn't be a first, and you can bet your mortgage it won't be the last.
It is great to have opinions, but what you said is not how the rules read. And having said all of that, some will interpret the rules differently based on many factors. What I am telling you is the rules do not consider contact illegal unless there is an advantage created. And that involves judgment of course and even the severity of the contact does not make the action illegal. Once again, read 4-27 and come back to the site and tell me where your rules support for your statement lies.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 24, 2008, 02:36pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 44
Well, JR, I beleive both of us are wrong at times, and I'm right less often that you. This arguement is a dead end.
I read 4-27 and get what its saying about incidental contact. The idea of advantage is in there, but not expressly written.

P.S. Andy Pettitt helped me write this.

Also I don't think my complete idea got across: illegal action could result in a foul, or violation. I think when it is thought of in terms of a violation it hits the points better, although I will agree the OP is talking about fouls.

Situations:
  • Whistle on an illegal action deemed to affect play (advantage) = a good call
  • Whistle on a legal play = a bad call
  • No whistle on an illegal action deemed to not affect play (no advantage) = a good no call
  • No whistle on an illegal action deemed to affect play (advantage) = a bad no call

Last edited by Beemer; Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 02:42pm.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 24, 2008, 02:58pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemer
The idea of advantage is in there, but not expressly written.
[/LIST]
Try reading the section titled "THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE RULES" on p.10 of the NFHS rulebook.The idea of advantage/disadvantage is expressly written there.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 24, 2008, 03:21pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,856
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemer
Well, JR, I beleive both of us are wrong at times, and I'm right less often that you. This arguement is a dead end.
I read 4-27 and get what its saying about incidental contact. The idea of advantage is in there, but not expressly written.

P.S. Andy Pettitt helped me write this.

Also I don't think my complete idea got across: illegal action could result in a foul, or violation. I think when it is thought of in terms of a violation it hits the points better, although I will agree the OP is talking about fouls.

Situations:
  • Whistle on an illegal action deemed to affect play (advantage) = a good call
  • Whistle on a legal play = a bad call
  • No whistle on an illegal action deemed to not affect play (no advantage) = a good no call
  • No whistle on an illegal action deemed to affect play (advantage) = a bad no call
Beemer...good to see a fellow WA boy in here debating rules and situations with these guys.
You will certainly learn a lot...it will make you a better official, IMO...and you may just win a battle or two, with these stubborn louts, at some point.

(You have a PM)

Oh yeah...I had a "no call" the other night. Some might say it was a "missed call".
So, maybe we can have *good calls, *bad calls, *no calls, and *missed calls...(or would that be a "bad no call")?
__________________
Dan Ivey
Tri-City Sports Officials Asso. (TCSOA)
Member since 1989
Richland, WA

Last edited by RookieDude; Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 03:28pm.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 24, 2008, 03:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 1,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
Try reading the section titled "THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE RULES" on p.10 of the NFHS rulebook.The idea of advantage/disadvantage is expressly written there.

Thanks JR, I have read this before but it does the EGO some good to rehash the "THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE RULES".
__________________
truerookie
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 24, 2008, 04:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 44
i know i'm not 'the sh*t' but i hope i'm not 'sh*t' either

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
Try reading the section titled "THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE RULES" on p.10 of the NFHS rulebook.The idea of advantage/disadvantage is expressly written there.
Hey man, I'm just learning to read so go easy. But my comment, if you are going to get technical on me, was intended for page 36. Go read 4-27, and try to tell me the word advantage appears (which, as I can see myself needing to clarify, would constitute being expressly written). Its not.

Now...*sigh*...I know the feeling when players try to tell me they are 'getting hammered'
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 24, 2008, 05:27pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemer
Hey man, I'm just learning to read so go easy. But my comment, if you are going to get technical on me, was intended for page 36. Go read 4-27, and try to tell me the word advantage appears (which, as I can see myself needing to clarify, would constitute being expressly written). Its not.

Now...*sigh*...I know the feeling when players try to tell me they are 'getting hammered'
Sorry to bother you. It won't happen again.

Have a good career.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Turned down the opportunity to call "Delay Return to the Court" T yesterday. ca_rumperee Basketball 16 Thu Jan 24, 2008 04:16am
Finding a "good" video/DVD on 2 man mechanics" Linknblue Basketball 3 Mon Dec 10, 2007 09:55am
Can "FOUL" be made "FAIR"? PAT THE REF Baseball 60 Sat Feb 24, 2007 09:01pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:53pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1