- You bring up some excellent points we all need to realize there have been two times Chaney has reacted recklessly 1) John Calipari ( at umass I will kill you)Message 1 of 114 , Feb 28, 2005View SourceYou bring up some excellent points we all need to realize there have been two times Chaney has reacted recklessly1) John Calipari ( at umass I will kill you)2) St Joesph's( the goon incident )these two incidents have one thing in common but these are two teams that at the time of the incident they had Chaney number
Steven Fraser <sfraser55@...> wrote:
This is ridiculous, I can't believe people are arguing about this. Here's a fact - there are moving screens, illegal picks in, ..... wait for it..... EVERY BASKTEBALL GAME. Of course, there are more in some games than others. But no - matter what, no matter what, what-so-ever, does soembody bending the rules make it right in my mind to go a step further by dis-respecting the game and it's players.
Illegal screens are like holding in football, there are moving picks in ALMOST every play, it's up to the referees judgement as to whether they are giving a team an unfair advantage. Some of them are unseen. But it's extremely unreasonable to question St.Josephs training tactics with regards to setting picks. Do you really think Phil Martelli, NCAA coach of the year, instructed his players to go out and set illegal picks....against Temple?
Cheaney is a WAS a great coach in my mind before this. Be he let his JEALOUSLY for St.Josephs sucess get the better of him.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. Learn more.
- Whether it s in writing or not, officials use an advantage/disadvantage position. They really don t have a choice, especially considering the points youMessage 114 of 114 , Mar 5 6:32 AMView SourceWhether it's in writing or not, officials use an advantage/disadvantage position. They really don't have a choice, especially considering the points you brought up if every touch was called. Let's face it, basketball is a contact sport! That means it's going to happen and it's up to the officials to determine whether or not it was legal or illegal contact. As in any field of work, there are good ones and 'not-so-good' (I hate to say bad since I'm a ref too) ones. We're trying but there are always going to be questionable calls.
Sars300@... wrote:This is one of those subjects where we could "discuss" it forever. As for me... I certainly wouldn't want to be coaching a game where the refs called every little bit of incidental contact.Boxing out (contact) fighting through screens, checking cutters, setting screens, fighting for position in the post, a little touch out front etc.That game would take forever so if you have a preliminary game... I would cancel it unless you start that one right after school.Do you REALLY want every single bit of contact called? Just once I would like to see (not really) a game where they called everything... bring your dinner because it is going to take forever. I wonder how long it would take and how many players you would need because a bunch would foul out. OK, I know what your answer is... there would be NO contact at all..... hmmmmm ....... The game is too fast, the athletes are too big and strong for that.Remember at the beginning of the year... a point of emphasis was going to be... a foul would be called every time some one took a charge (or attempted to).... charge or block.... How many of you have seen this enforced? I've been to several games this year and haven't seen this call.... not even ONCE. There sure was contact there! JMO of courseCoach Sar ( Ken )
I've been told to only assess the direct consequences of contact when
deciding whether or not to call a foul. So we have to try to decide,
immediately after the contact occurs, whether or not to blow a
foul. 'Holding' the call would make this easier in some ways, but it
would also have drawbacks. For example, imagine a player gets lightly
bumped while driving to the basket (but before shooting). As the
rules are, if there's no advantage the dribbler will continue with
the drive and take her chances that the shot may miss, but if she is
disadvantaged by the contact she will (or at least should) make her
first priority keeping control of the ball. But if the dribbler knows
the ref's holding a call, she could get the best of both worlds by
putting up a shot no matter what. Then, if the shot goes in she's
scored, and if it doesn't it's going to look like it was the contact
that made her miss, and the ref calls the foul and she gets the ball
back. To prevent this the ref would have to make an advantage
decision straight after the contact occurs, which is what happens
I don't think there are really any easy solutions to this problem.
It's a hard rule to enforce, and I know that I quite often get it
wrong myself. Part of the problem is that many refs officiate
different ages and standards of basketball, and find it hard to keep
adjusting. A level of contact that would never bother adult men can
still seem very heavy to 8 year old girls. I think the most we can
hope for is that refs will let the game go when there's obviously no
advantage (eg. 'innocent' team has a fastbreak opportunity), call the
fouls where the 'innocent' team would obviously be better off taking
the ball from the sideline, call the persistent light fouls (eg.
handchecking and so on) and do the best they can in the grey areas.
Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday!
Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web