I think it is out job to know as much about the game as possible. For example I called two carry/palming calls last Friday and the coach tried to imply that I called more than anyone else. My response was to him, "We have called 5 (palming) calls in this first half, and I called the last two." I did not hear much of anything from him after that. ;)

If you know it better prepares you for if and when you call that 5th foul you are prepare to handle it. Also I feel that you should not change what you do, but you should be aware. Because that 5th foul better be good or this might be one of the plays they send to the supervisor. I would like the foul to be there, but then again, kids foul out all the time and I was not aware of this. I guess it really depends on who the player is that has the 4th foul and what his coach thinks of that kid.

Peace

Seriously ...
 

We've been told this in our little corner of Connecticut, but first we check to make sure that all the doors are closed, all the windows are covered, and then we're told in a very, very quiet whisper.

I've heard/read this numerous times and the main problem I have is that it infers that it is less important that the first 4 be "good" whatever that means.

That is the way you see it. Like it or not, all fouls are not treated the same and all times of the game are not treated the same. And what a coach will send to a supervisor is not going to be the same. And if something helps you focus and make sure you do not make a mistake, I am all for it.

Peace

Ummm, no. You inferred that. The statement, however, does not imply that. ;)

Agreed.

Peace

infer: v. to hint, imply, suggest

If one states, specifically, that "The fifth foul should be a good one," I think most reasonable people would agree that it implies that the quality of the fifth foul is more important than the other four.

I personally have seen a player foul out and said/thought "I called a couple of cheap ones on him early." I find this just as distasteful as the fifth being less than a good one.

When I say this, I want to make sure the 5th one is a good one. The four other fouls could have been good too. But that is in the past and I cannot worry about what I called before. I can only worry about what I am going to do or how I want to call things. A good example is I do not care if the first foul of the game was terrible, but the last foul of the game with the game on the line better be there and not as bad as the first. And yes, I might have called a couple of cheap ones earlier and I do not want to continue the mistake. I guess if someone says to you "They will remember the last minute of a game more than they will remember the other 31 minutes in the game..." that means to you that you screwed up the first 31 minutes, I have to call the last minute different?

Peace

English. Learn it. Use it. Love it.

–verb (used with object)
1. to derive by reasoning; conclude or judge from premises or evidence: They inferred his displeasure from his cool tone of voice.
2. (of facts, circumstances, statements, etc.) to indicate or involve as a conclusion; lead to.
3. to guess; speculate; surmise.
4. to hint; imply; suggest.
–verb (used without object)
5. to draw a conclusion, as by reasoning.


"The fifth foul should be a good one" is merely a statement. It implies nothing about the earlier four fouls. You have chosen to infer something about the earlier four fouls from the statement that simply is not there.

The flaw in this logic is that if too many of these "terrible" calls are made early in the game which you "do not care" about, conceivably they could keep the game from being on the line on the last call.

Beginning, end,one is not much more important than the other...........in theory.............which is all we are discussing here.

Exactly.

Where did I say I did not care? This why you really need to read the comments and stop assuming (implying) what I meant by my comments. I said there will be more focus on the 5th foul. You do not have to agree with that, but in my experience what happens later in a game is always put more focus on. And the importance of the player to their team, the more they will focus on it. And if you think they the last few fouls of the game are not important, then why does the media focus on the last second shot in highlights? What was wrong with the first minute of the game? Why only show highlights of the end of the game when the other parts of the game are just as important? But my logic is flawed?

Peace

Agreed in theory. In practice, though, it's different.

Exactly. The ideal is "five good fouls". The reality is that of the five, the last one is the one matters most and that everybody will remember.

Ok, good. I was simply reacting to your original comment.

Fixed it.