"And 1" a bad call?

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by doubleringer

It's a soccer mentality?! I'll never do it again.

It's not really a soccer mentality. The soccer mentality is we don't punish fouls when the penalty for the foul is less advantageous for offended team than the current situation is. We still acknowledge the foul by calling out "Play on."

The only place a soccer-style advantage could be played would be a breakaway where a foul which wasn't a shooting foul would stop play but not the breakaway. (Perhaps a passer getting killed after the ball is away or a dribbler being held but he quickly gets away without anyone getting between him and the basket.)

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

The soccer mentality is we don't punish fouls when the penalty for the foul is less advantageous for offended team than the current situation is.

That's equivalent to what the OP was saying, or at least, that's how I inferred it.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by bainsey

That's equivalent to what the OP was saying, or at least, that's how I inferred it.

Advantage in soccer acknowledges that there was a foul but awarding the penalty would hurt you. Advantage is soccer is expressly not ignoring the foul (even if the parents think that's what we are doing).

What the gent in the OP is suggesting is that we ignore fouls on made baskets. That has nothing to do with penalty hurting the offended team but we a misunderstanding of what advantage/disadvantage is.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

What the gent in the OP is suggesting is that we ignore fouls on made baskets.

Right, which is something we do in soccer.

In an attacker is fouled while he blasts a shot into the upper 90, we ignore the foul (unless it's cardworthy). While there's no need to yell "play on" here, the advantage concept is still applied.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Right, which is something we do in soccer.

In an attacker is fouled while he blasts a shot into the upper 90, we ignore the foul (unless it's cardworthy). While there's no need to yell "play on" here, the advantage concept is still applied.

We're not ignoring it; we're playing advantage even if we don't signal it in this particular case. It's still a completely different thing than what's being suggested and done for a completely different reason.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

We're not ignoring it; we're playing advantage even if we don't signal it in this particular case. It's still a completely different thing than what's being suggested and done for a completely different reason.

I think it's exactly the same thing.

In the soccer case, the reason the foul "appears" ignored, is because we're playing advantage, as you said. The OP is attempting the same principle in basketball, to play the advantage by ignoring a foul when the score counted.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by bainsey

I think it's exactly the same thing.

In the soccer case, the reason the foul "appears" ignored, is because we're playing advantage, as you said. The OP is attempting the same principle in basketball, to play the advantage by ignoring a foul when the score counted.

In soccer:

Advantage played: a goal is scored.
Foul called: no goal is awarded and a penalty kick is given

Which best suits the offended team? Advantage.

In basketball:

"Advantage" played: a goal is scored.
Foul called: a goal is scored and a free throw is given.

Which best suits the offended team? Calling the foul. Every time.

So, no, the concept of advantage from soccer, namely, don't allow the offended team to be hurt more by enforcing the penalty for a foul, is not the motivation to not calling "and ones" because an "and one" doesn't hurt the offended team.