How do you feel about delayed foul calls?

[MagicalMan]

This has probably been discussed, but im observing that more often than not, the ref waits to blow the whistle until after he sees if the ball goes in. If it does they dont call the foul, if it doesn't they then call it.

Does anyone else notice this?
Should fouls be determined this way?
Is it fair?

[Serpo]

I like delayed calls better then these stupid touch fouls were literally nothing happens and the offensive player get's a 3-point oportunity .

[MagicalMan]

I like delayed calls better then these stupid touch fouls were literally nothing happens and the offensive player get's a 3-point oportunity .

But isn't a foul a foul regardless of if the ball goes in or not?

[theGreatRC]

I think the refs should base their judgment on if the player was touched while going to the hoop, not if the ball goes in the basket or not.

I feel like it is a bail out call, it usually happens with superstars/all-stars, and it isn't fair most of the time.

[Man_Up]

Better late then never when it's an obvious call.

I'm also not big on touch fouls, and the new hand checking rules.

[Serpo]

-= original quote snipped =-



But isn't a foul a foul regardless of if the ball goes in or not?

A real foul maybe but so many calls aren't really fouls , these just don't deserve to become a 3-point opportunities .

[Rampage]

I'd rather the refs get the call right in general.

As far as the original point, you're basically asserting that you know what's going through the mind of the refs in that situation.

[theGreatRC]

I'd rather the refs get the call right in general.

As far as the original point, you're basically asserting that you know what's going through the mind of the refs in that situation.

These guys are the best of the best in the reffing world. They were picked because they have a quick judgment on what happened on the court. Delayed calls just make me spite the refs that much more.

[theTHIEF]

suspicious...

[HarlemHeat37]

I hate when refs wait to see if the ball goes in or not..annoys me..I see it with Lebron a fair amount..I liked how Lebron was reffed vs. Houston last night..they weren't giving him touch fouls in the inside, which is how it should always be for everyone..

[circushots]

for me it depends...

there are times when the player is actually mildly fouled, and it is the ref's discretion as to whether it's a no-call or not. during these times i fully agree with waiting it out.

then there are other times when star players miss shots which they normally should make - missed dunks, layups, etc - and those should not be called a foul. in the referee's defence, some of these plays happen so quickly and sometimes in traffic, so they are almost forced to call the play based on their memory of the player's past history...

overall, i don't mind the call so much, because even though it frustrates me at times, if the refs blow the call completely then they will make up for it on the other end. not a big deal, imo.

[Papercut]

Sometimes (rarely) the reason a call will be delayed is that an outside official will wait for the other official (whose job it is) to make the call, and when they don't, the outside official will blow the whistle.

But in most situations it's infuriating. People have been talking about refs waiting to see if the ball goes in, but it's also VERY common for them to wait and see if a player turns the ball over, and if he does THEN they'll make a call. For example, in last night's GS-Chicago game, Joe Smith got an offensive board and then fell over with basically zero contact. Pietrus was also going for the rebound, so they called a foul on him, even though there's no way they would have called anything had Smith not lost his balance.

That's just one minor example, but you see it all the time. They'll let contact go, but then if the guy loses the ball they'll blow the whistle. I think it's genuinely hurting the game and the perception of the refs. They shouldn't be worrying about what the results of a play are, they should just be calling the fouls they see.

[CITYOFANGELSX3]

Delayed calls are annoying as hell. They miss a call and feel the need to call it. Sometimes when they get fouled the refs wait for either the shot to go in or if they miss to call it. Its ridiculous.

[theGreatRC]

Better yet, how do you guys feel about make up calls?

The refs make one call they think was a mistake, and 10 seconds later, make a call on the other end sending it the other way.

[Mateen Cleaves]

i dont like them calling a foul if it doesnt go in, either its a foul on first contact or its not. The ball going in or out shouldnt decide if the foul is gonna get called or not. Stern should do something about that but it wont happen.

[SlickWilly8]

Touch foul's can suck my B@!!$,

[Desmond24]

Some of the delayed call when the basket goes in may be the official determining if the contact was enough to alter the shot (deciding between minimal, incidental and foulworthy contact). Other times they are processing the action and calling the foul, making it appear they wait for the result of the field goal attempt. Delayed calls are not bad calls, make up calls or mistakes but deliberate actions since you can't reverse a call. For instance, the official thinks there was contact that was worthy of a foul call and whistles the foul. Then after processing it in his mind realizes that it was incidental contact. He cannot reverse his call and then just called a foul against a player that wasn't a foul. It's called a patient whistle.

[bleu]

.

[MagicalMan]

I think its perfectly fine. The reffs got a **** hard job, and probably gotta think for a sec before they make any call. Give 'em a break.

Give 'em a break? Isnt part of their jobs to call fouls? Not wait until the play is over to decide if a foul is warranted. Isnt a foul a foul, regardless of if the ball goes in?

I understand why they do it, but my question was should they do it.

[theTHIEF]

Better yet, how do you guys feel about make up calls?

c'mon, those dont exist in the NBA...