Thread: Ask the Ref?
View Single Post
Old 08-20-14, 06:07 AM
AllSports12 AllSports12 is offline
All World
Join Date: 01-31-07
Posts: 3,488
AllSports12 is on a distinguished road
Originally Posted by Look Ma No Hands View Post
Allsports, sounds like I have offended you. Not intended. I do appreciate you pointing out the "actionless" rule. I want to read the rule it in its entirety, not to show you wrong in its interpretation, but rather to further my knowledge on the matter.

I certainly understand your viewpoints as expressed, and that they indeed might be 100% accurate in their application.

I do hope you understand my position as well:
1) I do struggle with telling kids to intentionally violate any rules to gain advantage. I certainly realize it (intentionally fouling) is "accepted practice," but I am talking from an educational / ethical viewpoint. Ends > means. It's a philosophical position.

2) That I think it a bit hypocritical (not you, but the application of the rules) to actually elevate the strategical practice of violating rules (intentionally fouling) to gain an advantage, but to say intentionally violating other rules to gain an advantage warrants a technical.

3) That I will never win that battle.

If you recall, the whole intentional fouling for an advantage came under the microscope after Jim Valvano at NC State used it often at the end of games on the way to the national title. The NCAA didn't like it too much, and instituted "the Valvano Rule," which upset many coaches and it was rescinded. This rule eventually evolved to be instituted as today's "double bonus," instead of never-ending one-and-ones.

An interesting discussion on the topic:

Check your private messages.
No offense taken whatsoever. Over the years I've had things directed towards me that would cause even the most docile person to respond in a manner that would result in a prison sentence. it's part of the job.

We are however, spinning our wheels on this. From a basketball purist point of view, most points you raise are 100% valid. (except the violating to make a team do something that's not required to do ) My point of view is tied to the "why's and what for's" of the rule. If the rule were to change tomorrow, my first charge is to understand why the rule was changed and enforce it accordingly. That way when challenged, I can respond in a manner other than "that's the rule".

Time to move on with regards to this subject.......
Reply With Quote