I agree with the above sentiment. I get really peeved when I hear guys talk like that.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Like it or not, that WAS the philosophy...about 15 years ago. Sounds like this "experienced official" hasn't quite caught up with the times!
|
Quote:
My threshold for the "kill the loser with kindness"-philosophy is somewhere in the 60%-40% range. IOW, judgement plays that are slightly over a 50%-50% ratio of going either way...I'm giving to the team that is losing. You can't be too obvious in "giving the benefit of the doubt" to the losing team..... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
It takes no more energy/effort to take into account the game situation on plays than it does to remember the same/similar play occurring earlier in a game and making sure that similar plays have similar results. The BEST officials have excellent game awareness and play recall. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Failing to call a minor violation (3 sec, ticky-tack stuff) against a team that's getting trounced is one thing. Making a call for the wrong team at a point when something has to be called one way or the other (block/charge; ball went out off white instead of red, etc) is a completely different thing.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Done and done. |
Everybody's Got Some Type Of Camera Nowadays ...
Quote:
Thirty years ago, back in the olden days, this was a easy call. Ignore the contact, but give Team B the ball for a throwin. I made this call dozens of times. Today. Different story. Now we have to chose. Foul on A1, or throwin for Team A. No other choices here. It's a different world. Like JRutledge said, it's the "Video Age". |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:34pm. |