Foul out of bounds

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. I'm not arguing about whether the call should or shouldn't be a foul, or a simple OOB call. That would be someting the calling official can judge while seeing the actual play. I'm simply pointing out that, at least in NCAA-W, the "peripheral stuff", as you called it, does NOT matter in how this call is made. It will be the same call in the 1st half of a close game as it will be in the second half of a blowout. It SHOULD NOT matter if the team that got bumped and lost the ball OOB is ahead or behind by 30 points.

Again, if you get a chance to read her full article, she talks about the difference between managing situations vs. managing calls. Managing situations, even if it goes against the "letter" of the rule, is not only expected, but encouraged. Managing calls, which is what is being discussed here, is strongly discouraged. Managing calls turns into manipulation.

Maybe the philosophy really is different in NCAA-M, or NBA. I would be curious to see if anyone can post anything in writing that verifies this philosophy. Or, could that philosophy be another addition to BillyMac's Myth list?

I agree totally with her. I believe in managing situations and NOT in managing calls. Im not advocating doing that in this OP either but I think on a borderline play where you have a chance to be right whether you choose option A)calling a foul or option B) not calling the foul, you let the "peripheral stuff" play a role. For example, I wanna get a block/charge play right all the time bc I PERSONALLY believe it is such an emotional play in which coaches and fans act out the most at, but if I have a play on the sideline similar to the play in the OP, this is not a play in which a coach could lose his cool over more than a block/charge EXCEPT in a rare case such as the OP by calling a foul on a guy's high scorer (the person in the OP was using this factor not me) and on top of his team getting beaten by 30 ( I would use this as a factor). When you can be right either way, why not be right for the team getting the crap beat out of them? Now that being said if you truly believe a whistle must be blown then go ahead, you would still be right and I would support it as an advisor or a partner, but my question would be what do you think would be best for THAT game in particular?

Remember as has been stated, this was a slight bump not a bump that knocked the player to the floor.

Dave Libby said it best I believe when he said you can call the same play two different ways at different times in the game and still be right. I believe for the most part this is correct.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

I agree totally with her. I believe in managing situations and NOT in managing calls.

Originally Posted by btaylor64

...you let the "peripheral stuff" play a role.

Dave Libby said it best I believe when he said you can call the same play two different ways at different times in the game and still be right. I believe for the most part this is correct.

Well, which is it? You don't "agree totaly with her" if you do allow some of the peripheral stuff to play a role in how a foul call is made. You certainly don't agree if you can call the same play diferent ways at different times in the game, and still be right each time.