![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
is not the right way, in my opinion. |
Pulling the jersey is a no brainer - INT foul.
|
Quote:
It's a strategy, nothing more, nothing less. I guess we shouldn't recognize a excessive timeout in such a situation. After all, it's a technical foul and therefore, "illegal." |
Quote:
Particularly if the offense is trying to avoid being fouled. OTOH, if the offense is content to allow the foul, I'm likely to call first contact. |
Quote:
For me, it comes down to advantageous contact. If the contact is trifling, and the offense can work through it (i.e. hand checking an opponent that's already passed you), then I believe you're rewarding the defense by stopping the clock, even if they're going to the line. If the defense is making an obvious play for the ball, then I believe the foul to be "earned." Intentional fouls are exactly as others have described. Simply put, I don't believe in blowing the whistle just because the defense wants you to. I say, pursue the ball, and earn the foul. If contact becomes excessive, then penalize accordingly by crossing those arms. |
Quote:
Quote:
The FED does not require that the ball be played in order to have a foul or not have an intentional foul. Fouls are also committed because the defender is playing the PLAYER. Call the first foul and then you won't have "excessive contact. Hopefully, as you gain experience, you'll come to understand this better. If you're smart, you will. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
I understand your preventive officiating point of view, and I respect your experience, but I have never cared for the so-called "strategy" of fouling to stop the clock, and I believe if you're going to foul, at least you can try to steal the ball. (Such attempted steals are very seldom excessive.) Otherwise, I don't believe you deserve the advantage of a stopped clock, and as always, we need to be concerned about advantage/disadvantage. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:47pm. |