Establishing confidence, confidence and respect from coaches and players

[Hugh Refner]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

... an obvious foul is different to a fan that it is to a coach. It's different to a coach than it is a player.

I really couldn't care less whether a fan, coach or player thinks a foul is "obvious" or not. Any foul that fits the rulebook definition of a foul and that is clearly seen by me is an "obvious" foul and I call it. Yeah - I know a lot of contact is subjective as to whether it had an effect on the fouled player, but that comes with experience. I don't think there's any doubt that some fouls are "obvious" - a player taking both of his hands and pushing another player into a wall, for instance. Is there anyone here who wouldn't consider that an "obvious" foul?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Hugh Refner

I really couldn't care less whether a fan, coach or player thinks a foul is "obvious" or not. Any foul that fits the rulebook definition of a foul and that is clearly seen by me is an "obvious" foul and I call it. Yeah - I know a lot of contact is subjective as to whether it had an effect on the fouled player, but that comes with experience. I don't think there's any doubt that some fouls are "obvious" - a player taking both of his hands and pushing another player into a wall, for instance. Is there anyone here who wouldn't consider that an "obvious" foul?

Probably not, but no one is talking about a play where someone puts someone in the wall. That being said, just because someone ended up in the wall does not mean you have a foul either. Contact can be severe and not have a foul (under the rules). So the issues are definitely not cut and dry even amongst all officials. If it was, then some would not be working certain levels and others never advance. Judgment is a big part of this.

Peace

Originally Posted by Hugh Refner

I don't think there's any doubt that some fouls are "obvious" - a player taking both of his hands and pushing another player into a wall, for instance. Is there anyone here who wouldn't consider that an "obvious" foul?

Not only is that "obvious", but it's also a non-basketball play that might require a dq. I believe Snaqs was speaking on dislikes for using the term "obvious fouls" in regards to regular contact during the course of a game.

Ever had a player holding the ball in a triple threat position & the defender whacks him across the arm while reaching for the ball? Sounds like "obvious" contact but it may/may not be a foul. The good players don't want that call, even though the fans want it & think you're horrible for not making the call... until the player takes it to the rack & puts his defender on a poster, that is.

Then it becomes good officiating to stay out of that play

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

Not only is that "obvious", but it's also a non-basketball play that might require a dq. I believe Snaqs was speaking on dislikes for using the term "obvious fouls" in regards to regular contact during the course of a game.

Exactly, which is why I added "(personal preference)" to the post. My point is that using the term "obvious foul" is pointless since it means something different to everyone involved.