Throw-in ... Step Over Line

[theteeto]

Call it the way they tell you to? Call some traveling, but not others? Is this for real? As my rules guru always says, it's not about what you think, or the body thinks, or the crowd thinks, it's about the RULES! Either they carried, or they didn't! Also, a quick note on advantage/disadvantage--that's also horse puckey. To illustrate, what about screens? There's contact, and an advantage is gained, but is there a foul? Well, it depends on the situation (and not A/D) right? But how do we know if it's a foul? If only some group would publish a book...with guidelines, or maybe even rules!

[ChuckElias]

First of all, theteeto, welcome to the board. I think you will learn a lot here and we always welcome thoughtful contributions. From the two posts you've made so far, I can only guess, but it sounds like you are a newer official. That's not an insult , it's just the impression I get from your posts. So I hope you will stick around. You will get a lot out of this board.

Originally posted by theteeto
Call it the way they tell you to? Call some traveling, but not others? Is this for real?

Actually, it is very real. We'd all love it if everybody called the game exactly per the book. And we'd all love it if our supervisors wanted each play called the same way. Unfortunately, not all assignors and supervisors share your outlook. And if we want to work games from these supervisors, we must have their approval. How do you get (and keep) that approval? By calling the game the way they want it called. That's just the fact of the matter.

Also, a quick note on advantage/disadvantage--that's also horse puckey.

I respectfully disagree. And I don't think you'll find too many allies on the board, either. Advantage/disadvantage can certainly be abused and applied when it might be better not to, but the principles of Ad/Disad are clearly in the rulebook. There is such a thing as incidental contact (defined in Rule 4), which means that there is contact, but the contact did not give either player an advantage. So we don't whistle it. If we didn't apply Ad/Disad at all, we'd have 10 whistles on every possession.

To illustrate, what about screens? There's contact, and an advantage is gained, but is there a foul? Well, it depends on the situation (and not A/D) right? But how do we know if it's a foul? If only some group would publish a book...with guidelines, or maybe even rules!

I see your point, but it's not as simplistic as that. Yes, there can be contact on a legal screen where contact is made; and this would not be a foul. Very true. Legal screens are pretty well defined in the rulebook. I would say that the contact could even be very hard without calling a foul on a legally set screen.

But now consider a screen that is not legally set. Ok, the offensive screener is moving and there is contact with a defender. But in this sitch, there's no advantage gained. Now do you have a foul? I hope not. Why? It's not b/c of the contact; it's b/c there was no advantage gained by the offense.

So the Tower Philosophy (Ad/Disad) is very important in keeping the game flowing and allowing the players to play without penalizing every single infraction that doesn't affect the game at all.

That's just my opinion, but I think you'll find it's shared by a lot of officials. Again, keep on posting, keep on reading. Glad you're here.

Chuck