Backboard padding

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

No, just that he doesn't know elementary physics. It is a basic scientific fact that if it actually hit the back of the board, it would not continue forward unless it went through the board. It would be deflected backwards. That could be determined without ever looking at where it hit. You only need to know where the ball came from and where it ended up. No judgement needed.

It is sort of like a player deflecting the ball. If the ball distinctly changes direction near an isolated player, you don't have to see the player actually touch it to know they touched it.

Judgment is seeing an act and deciding if it did or did not violate a rule....it isn't not being able to see an absolute event.

You and I define judgment call differently, then.

I tend to view it in the way a baseball umpire views it -- it's a sport where we have protests which do not include judgment decisions. If the official said, "the ball hit the back of the board," that's judgment all day long. That protest would never be upheld.

Dead horse, beaten.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich

You and I define judgment call differently, then.

I tend to view it in the way a baseball umpire views it -- it's a sport where we have protests which do not include judgment decisions. If the official said, "the ball hit the back of the board," that's judgment all day long. That protest would never be upheld.

Dead horse, beaten.

Taking the baseball analogy...what if the ump called a strike on a ball that was hit as evidenced by the ball coming off the bat and going to 2nd base? Judgement?

[maven]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Taking the baseball analogy...what if the ump called a strike on a ball that was hit as evidenced by the ball coming off the bat and going to 2nd base? Judgement?

It depends:

1. If the umpire ruled that any swing counts as a strike, then it would be a rule issue.

2. If the umpire ruled that the batter swung and missed, then it would be a judgment issue.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by Rich

You and I define judgment call differently, then.

I tend to view it in the way a baseball umpire views it -- it's a sport where we have protests which do not include judgment decisions. If the official said, "the ball hit the back of the board," that's judgment all day long. That protest would never be upheld.

Dead horse, beaten.

I agree that it's a judgement issue. I disagree that it's a judgement issue that shouldn't be brought up by an observing official. Pointing out that the ball would have deflected back towards the thrower had it hit the back of the backboard is a reasonable comment because it's a physical fact that the judgement was wrong.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I agree that it's a judgement issue. I disagree that it's a judgement issue that shouldn't be brought up by an observing official. Pointing out that the ball would have deflected back towards the thrower had it hit the back of the backboard is a reasonable comment because it's a physical fact that the judgement was wrong.

I'm a big fan of not bringing *anything* up unless the JV officials ask for feedback / input. Remember, I do not work in a system where we assign games from an association and many times the JV officials just grab their coats and leave. Not my place to jump in unless they ask, far as I'm concerned.