Things I learned at camp

[tref]

Originally Posted by Welpe

Are you saying that in certain situations you wait to see if the shot goes in before whistling a foul?

AbsoFREAKINlutely!

Contact in the paint is far different from contact on the perimiter.
Once WE as officials get better on determining RSBQ vs SDF oh what a wonderful world it will be!

No disrespect, but it seems to me that its the vets who dont want to change their mindset. Probably why WE dont put em on the FT line as WE should on drives to the basket. The GAME has changed & WE need to adapt.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tref

AbsoFREAKINlutely!

Contact in the paint is far different from contact on the perimiter.
Once WE as officials get better on determining RSBQ vs SDF oh what a wonderful world it will be!

No disrespect, but it seems to me that its the vets who dont want to change their mindset. Probably why WE dont put em on the FT line as WE should on drives to the basket. The GAME has changed & WE need to adapt.

I'm going to disagree, but I can tell you there are some in my association who work this way, so it may come down to me simply acquiescing in order to move up. I look at it slightly differently than you do, t.

If the shot is noticeably more difficult due to the contact, I'll call a foul. I don't want allow the defense to break the rules simply because the shooter was able to make an adjustment he shouldn't have had to make.

I don't recall ever waiting to see the result of the shot before making that decision. I do, however, recall a partner telling me at a break that he'd waited for the shot to miss before making the call; on a three point shot.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by tref

AbsoFREAKINlutely!

Contact in the paint is far different from contact on the perimiter.
Once WE as officials get better on determining RSBQ vs SDF oh what a wonderful world it will be!

No disrespect, but it seems to me that its the vets who dont want to change their mindset. Probably why WE dont put em on the FT line as WE should on drives to the basket. The GAME has changed & WE need to adapt.

Like it or not, that (observing the affect on a shot with potentially incidental contact) is the concept being widely taught in this area at all levels.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Like it or not, that (observing the affect on a shot with potentially incidental contact) is the concept being widely taught in this area at all levels.

And there's nothing the matter with that either. You're determining whether the contact was illegal or incidental using advantage/disadvantage and a patient whistle while determining that advantage/disadvantage. That hasn't changed. But if you determine that the contact on the shooter was really illegal from the git-go, there is no need at all for a patient whistle and no need to see if the ball goes in or not either. If that weren't true, you'd never have an "and 1". You just wouldn't call a foul every time the ball went in.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

And there's nothing the matter with that either. You're determining whether the contact was illegal or incidental using advantage/disadvantage and a patient whistle while determining that advantage/disadvantage. That hasn't changed. But if you determine that the contact on the shooter was really illegal from the git-go, there is no need at all for a patient whistle and no need to see if the ball goes in or not either. If that weren't true, you'd never have an "and 1". You just wouldn't call a foul every time the ball went in.

In that case, I'd suggest that this entire debate is more about semantics than practical play calling.

I don't think anyone was suggesting passing on any/all contact just because the ball went in...just contact that was merely suspect.

If someone gets hammered, I'd hope everyone would have a call, even if the shot is made.

And I can't see using that much delay on a 3...this is more applicable in an interior situation.