Make the call

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Not necessarily. This is more about rule philosophy. I believe we all have solid knowledge.

The aforementioned case play makes it clear to me that you can't let the defense take away an obvious scoring opportunity from the offense. If the coach has such a problem with it that he would send in a tape to your supervisor, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Either the supervisor is going to back up your ruling, or at least talk with you about it. Either way, someone is going to learn something, and make a greater stride toward everyone getting on the same page.

My supervisors aren't going to accept me "learning something" in a real game that I already should have known.

The exception for a delayed whistle applies to unsporting behavior that is penalized by a technical foul. It's a specific case play. Extrapolating that to this play has no basis in the rule book because you already have rules and case plays that tell you how to handle personal fouls away from the ball when a shot is imminent.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

My supervisors aren't going to accept me "learning something" in a real game that I already should have known.

The exception for a delayed whistle applies to unsporting behavior that is penalized by a technical foul. It's a specific case play. Extrapolating that to this play has no basis in the rule book because you already have rules and case plays that tell you how to handle personal fouls away from the ball when a shot is imminent.

The rules and case book plays are not an exhaustive list of what you can/should call or not call. They are a framework showing you the direction and philosophy of how the game should generally be played what should be called. Yes, you should call plays that match the cases as they are presented in the casebok but when plays occur that fall between the cases, you have to extrapolate the spirit of the rules/cases to apply to the situation you have. Almost every rule, and many case plays are not written considering all contingencies...they're written as examples.

If you only made calls on plays that exactly match the case book, you'd be missing a lot of calls. Again, case book plays are not "specific" but are examples. You shouldn't limit yourself to applying the concepts in the case only to situations where the exact same events occur.

As for the delayed T, there is no rules basis for that case play either....but it is there.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The rules and case book plays are not an exhaustive list of what you can/should call or not call. They are a framework showing you the direction and philosophy of how the game should generally be played what should be called. Yes, you should call plays that match the cases as they are presented in the casebok but when plays occur that fall between the cases, you have to extrapolate the spirit of the rules/cases to apply to the situation you have. Almost every rule, and many case plays are not written considering all contingencies...they're written as examples.

If you only made calls on plays that exactly match the case book, you'd be missing a lot of calls. Again, case book plays are not "specific" but are examples. You shouldn't limit yourself to applying the concepts in the case only to situations where the exact same events occur.

As for the delayed T, there is no rules basis for that case play either....but it is there.

There is a case play for a delayed T whether there is a rule for it or not, pure and simple.

There are rules and cases plays for personal fouls away from the ball when shots are imminent or in flight.

I fail to see the grey that needs interpreting.