Freedom of Movement 10-6-12

[The_Rookie]

How does the "new rule" on contact on a ball handler on the perimeter compare to how you would call this type of contact it in the post area?

[bob jenkins]

FED makes no distinction between a "ball handler" on the perimeter and a "post player" with the ball. If the player has the ball, the rules on illegal contact (2 hands, one hand continuously, extended arm bar, hands repeatedly) apply.

Now, if there is legal contact with a post player without the ball, and the player receives a pass, I will give the defense a (fraction of a) second to remove the (now) illegal contact.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by The_Rookie

How does the "new rule" on contact on a ball handler on the perimeter compare to how you would call this type of contact it in the post area?

2012-13 NFHS Points of Emphasis:
b. Post play. Any tactic using hands, arms or body to control the movement of an opposing player.
Examples of illegal post play.
1. Hooking by the offensive player
2. Pushing, holding or slapping an opponent
3. Dislodging an opponent by using a leg or knee to the rear of an opponent
4. Dislodging an opponent by backing them down

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

FED makes no distinction between a "ball handler" on the perimeter and a "post player" with the ball. If the player has the ball, the rules on illegal contact (2 hands, one hand continuously, extended arm bar, hands repeatedly) apply.

Now, if there is legal contact with a post player without the ball, and the player receives a pass, I will give the defense a (fraction of a) second to remove the (now) illegal contact.

True. Case play, 10.6.12 .B
A1 receives a pass in the lane. B1 (a) places 2 hands on the dribbler, (b) places an extended arm bar on the dribbler, (c), places and keeps a hand on the dribbler, (d) contacts the dribbler more than once with the same hand or alternating hands.
RULING: Illegal in all cases. A personal foul shall be called any time this type of contact occurs on a player holding or dribbling the ball.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by OKREF

True. Case play, 10.6.12 .B
A1 receives a pass in the lane. B1 (a) places 2 hands on the dribbler, (b) places an extended arm bar on the dribbler, (c), places and keeps a hand on the dribbler, (d) contacts the dribbler more than once with the same hand or alternating hands.
RULING: Illegal in all cases. A personal foul shall be called any time this type of contact occurs on a player holding or dribbling the ball.

Rationale given by NFHS was that if they issued this as an actual rule, rather than merely a POE, it would actually be called by us. Whether or not a dribbler is able to "play through it" is apparently no longer a factor. They want it cleaned up out top. They want these four things called. "Automatics." Previous year's POE's and emphasis on RSBQ had a beneficial effect on many of us the past several years and that seemed to have a good effect on the perimeter. At least for many.
As mentioned previously, this exact phraseology was adopted as a POE for NCAA-W several years ago. Can any women's officials testify as to how those four "automatics" are doing now? Did they make it into the book as actual rules? Are your officials still calling it according to these four criteria? Any problems? Is it working for NCAA-W?

[APG]

NCAA, on both sides, made these automatics as written rules in the book last year.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Freddy

As mentioned previously, this exact phraseology was adopted as a POE for NCAA-W several years ago. Can any women's officials testify as to how those four "automatics" are doing now? Did they make it into the book as actual rules? Are your officials still calling it according to these four criteria? Any problems? Is it working for NCAA-W?

Originally Posted by APG

NCAA, on both sides, made these automatics as written rules in the book last year.

As APG correctly points out, both NCAA codes put the guidelines in as rules last season. NFHS is mirroring NCAAM (Appendix III-4-g) in terms of post play. NCAAW allows contact on a post player with or without the ball as long as the contact isn't illegal (Appendix III-3-a & b).

Freddy, I think it only seems as though NCAAW was doing it last season because there was lots of talk about it on the women's side and - no offense to the NCAAM officials here - it appeared as though we were more consistent with it. To answer your questions:

*The "automatics" appear to be working. The toughest one seems to be the arm bar on the dribbler. I know sometimes it takes me a beat to remember it's an automatic.
*Yes, we're still calling it. Our supervisors beat it into our heads every time there is a meeting/conference call. Cleaning up the post is this year's target.
*The numbers show it's working because scoring was up last season and not because of extra FTs. Shooting percentages were up and turnovers were down.

It works for us because the coaches buy into them and supervisors have been true to their word in supporting those of us who call them and penalizing those who don't.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Rationale given by NFHS was that if they issued this as an actual rule, rather than merely a POE, it would actually be called by us. Whether or not a dribbler is able to "play through it" is apparently no longer a factor. They want it cleaned up out top. They want these four things called. "Automatics." Previous year's POE's and emphasis on RSBQ had a beneficial effect on many of us the past several years and that seemed to have a good effect on the perimeter. At least for many.
As mentioned previously, this exact phraseology was adopted as a POE for NCAA-W several years ago. Can any women's officials testify as to how those four "automatics" are doing now? Did they make it into the book as actual rules? Are your officials still calling it according to these four criteria? Any problems? Is it working for NCAA-W?

I was at camp this summer, and we were told it was only supposed to apply outside the lane area. This case play clearly makes no distinction.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

As APG correctly points out, both NCAA codes put the guidelines in as rules last season. NFHS is mirroring NCAAM (Appendix III-4-g) in terms of post play. NCAAW allows contact on a post player with or without the ball as long as the contact isn't illegal (Appendix III-3-a & b).

Note (not that you don't know this, but for others) also that "post player" is defined in NCAAW and can include a player with the ball as long as her back is to the basket. Once she faces the basket, she moves from being a Post Player to a Ball Handler and the absolutes apply.

I agree with you on the difficulty with "arm bar". Part of if, I think, is that (a) the term isn't defined and (b) a "collapsed arm bar" is not an automatic. at what point does it go from "collapse" to "extended"?

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by OKREF

I was at camp this summer, and we were told it was only supposed to apply outside the lane area. This case play clearly makes no distinction.

OKREF, was it a HS camp? An NCAAM camp? AN NCAAW camp?

The camps I attended we applied the NCAAW interpretation because they were NCAAW camps and we may have figured - incorrectly as it turns out - NFHS would follow our code since it follows our code in many other areas (airborne shooter, etc.). Truth be told, if we wanted the HS kids to get used to what they'll see starting next month we should have been using the NCAAM code.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I agree with you on the difficulty with "arm bar". Part of if, I think, is that (a) the term isn't defined and (b) a "collapsed arm bar" is not an automatic. at what point does it go from "collapse" to "extended"?

Bob, it's defined in Appendix III-3 in Section A under Ball Handler or Dribbler (An arm-bar is contact with the forearm that is away from the body).

During the camps I attended where Jon Levinson was an observer or clinician it was mentioned that "collapsed arm bar" or "extended arm bar" may not be needed in the rule book since by definition it's a forearm away from the body. He said he'll take a look at it for the rule book next year.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by OKREF

I was at camp this summer, and we were told it was only supposed to apply outside the lane area. This case play clearly makes no distinction.

Sounds like you have a few people still trying to hang on to the old rules.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

OKREF, was it a HS camp? An NCAAM camp? AN NCAAW camp?

The camps I attended we applied the NCAAW interpretation because they were NCAAW camps and we may have figured - incorrectly as it turns out - NFHS would follow our code since it follows our code in many other areas (airborne shooter, etc.). Truth be told, if we wanted the HS kids to get used to what they'll see starting next month we should have been using the NCAAM code.




Bob, it's defined in Appendix III-3 in Section A under Ball Handler or Dribbler (An arm-bar is contact with the forearm that is away from the body).

During the camps I attended where Jon Levinson was an observer or clinician it was mentioned that "collapsed arm bar" or "extended arm bar" may not be needed in the rule book since by definition it's a forearm away from the body. He said he'll take a look at it for the rule book next year.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Sounds like you have a few people still trying to hang on to the old rules.

It was a HS camp. Our director of officials told us he contacted the NFHS during the camp weekend and told us the NFHS said it was to apply outside of the lane area. I don't have this in an email or bullet point of any kind. Just going by what the director said the NFHS told him.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by OKREF

It was a HS camp. Our director of officials told us he contacted the NFHS during the camp weekend and told us the NFHS said it was to apply outside of the lane area. I don't have this in an email or bullet point of any kind. Just going by what the director said the NFHS told him.

The problem with NFHS saying something like this is there is no such thing as the "lane area" in the HS code. It's defined under both NCAA codes (the three-second lane and approximately three feet just outside the lane on all sides). If this is what NFHS really wanted that's fine but the rule needed to be modified to reflect it.

[JRutledge]

I am not sure I agree that women's basketball officials were more consistent. The basketball I saw there were a lot of fouls. I know on the Men's side there were even more fouls than ever for most of the time. Games almost never fit in that 2 hour window that TV likes to use with TV Guides because of the amount of fouls being called.

And NCAAM does not care whether you have the ball in the post or on the perimeter, it is a foul if you violate the "absolutes." That is the way I saw it called all year in games I worked or games I watched.

On the HS side, we were told not call those fouls no matter where they take place. I do not have a lot of confidence in anything the NF says anyway as it appears they often say different things based on who is talking or sharing information.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not have a lot of confidence in anything the NF says anyway as it appears they often say different things based on who is talking or sharing information.

And things change, or get deemphasized, from year to year. Stupid NFHS.