Officials' Authorthy (2.6)

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

I don't think that's the case, there's no rule to minimize the advantage of being tall.

Then, what does provide equal opportunity for the tall and small player mean?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

Don't understand the example. That's strength and has nothing to do with height. The 6'7" guy was strong enough to finish, despite contact. Basketball is not an equal-opportunity game. The taller players have an advantage. But, there's a specific rule, to try to minimize that advantage? That doesn't make any sense. And, I'd also like to hear other examples from officials that gave an advantage to a small guy for some reason.

What rule? I thought the passage you referenced came from "Purpose and Intent".

[mbyron]

Don't confuse equality of opportunity with equality of outcome. Tall players have an advantage in basketball when it comes to rebounding. Small players have an advantage when they're quick and good ball handlers. The rules give both an opportunity to play to their strengths.

[Amesman]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

Then, what does provide equal opportunity for the tall and small player mean?

That's the one where they let the smaller guys just batter the bigger guys ("because they should be able to take it") ... and then of course, the smaller guys are told they have to slow down because the bigger guys can't keep up.

Ironically, we've probably all heard the former (either from a fan, coach or players themselves). But funny how the latter point never seems to come up, though.

Coach B, I don't think you're going to get a satisfactory answer to your question.

[Coach Bill]

The NFHS must have had something in mind if they felt the need to express in the intent of the rules: "to provide equal opportunity to the tall and small player".

I'm asking: Does anyone know what they had in mind?

Otherwise, it should just read equal opportunity to all players.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

Provide equal opportunity between the small and tall player. What does that mean? Take away the advantages a tall player has over a shorter player? For example, allow to the small player to push in the back on rebounds he wouldn't normally get because he's small? I don't get why this is in the rulebook. Does anyone have an example?

It could mean the NFHS doesn't want tall players unfairly penalized.

[dsqrddgd909]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

Then, what does provide equal opportunity for the tall and small player mean?

The only two I can come up with is there is no "over the back" call unfairly penalizing tall players and you are not allowed to hinder a player with your arms (4-24-6) or use an arm or forearm to prevent an opponent from attacking the ball (4-24-7) which may unfairly give an advantage to taller players.

[Back In The Saddle]

My thought on this is that the rules are written so that the game allows both tall and small players each to their strengths without favoring either. It is just as much a foul to illegally negate the guards quickness with a handcheck as it is to negate the big guy's post position by using your knee to dislodge him. The perimeter shooter is protected just as much as the guy takin' it to the hole. If a big guy and a little guy both go up for a rebound, their relative sizes aren't what matters, it's whether either uses illegal contact to gain an advantage. Within the rules the game should not be allowed to become so "physical" that only big guys can play.

Now that all has to do with gaining an illegal advantage. Being seven feet tall and athletic, that's a totally legal advantage.