A lot going on during this play. (Video)

JRutledge

What do you have and how would you officiate this play?

Peace

Freddy

. . . of many to follow, I'm sure:
"Get the first foul."
The contact at :07 was worthy of a call. That gets whistled and the rest would not have occurred. I don't think.

jpgc99

Freddy wrote
The contact at :07 was worthy of a call.

"Worthy of a call?" I'd go intentional on that, at minimum, depending on temperature of the game. Two forearms directly to the opponents head.

[deleted]

Two person, in the dead corner, in front of a bench. Pretty much the perfect storm for crap like this to escalate.

Rich

The T has to get over there and officiate on ball in his primary.

It's a foul at :07, but likely nothing more than a common foul.

ODog

jpgc99 wrote
"Worthy of a call?" I'd go intentional on that, at minimum ...

That was my instant reaction as well. Absolutely.

The second one was intentional also, but it's too far gone at that point.

deecee

That first foul needs to be called. And it's not intentional.

bob jenkins

If you don't get it, then there are a lot of ejections for leaving the bench when a fight may break out.

Lcubed48

bob jenkins wrote
If you don't get it, then there are a lot of ejections for leaving the bench when a fight may break out.

Always listen to Bob! Get the first foul.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Rich wrote
The T has to get over there and officiate on ball in his primary.

It's a foul at :07, but likely nothing more than a common foul.

Rich:

You are absolutely correct. If you get G1's foul against W1 and everything else is irrelevant because the game is now stopped and nothing else happened.

MTD, Sr.

CJP

jpgc99 wrote
"Worthy of a call?" I'd go intentional on that, at minimum, depending on temperature of the game. Two forearms directly to the opponents head.

I think an "Intentional Foul" is justifiable here.

Camron Rust

The first is not a passable call...any official that sees that should call it from any position, forget primaries. It is a hard foul, but not an intentional. Call it and the play ends.

After that, since it wasn't called, you have another foul on gold 2 that I believe would be intentional, then a bunch of Ts for people coming onto the floor for a possible fight. I do not see a foul on the player in white.

Rufus

During camp last year they emphasized that loose balls are not an excuse for a free-for-all and that, if you get the first player piling on, you avoid a lot of grief later.

RefRich

Camron Rust wrote
The first is not a passable call...any official that sees that should call it from any position, forget primaries. It is a hard foul, but not an intentional. Call it and the play ends.

After that, since it wasn't called, you have another foul on gold 2 that I believe would be intentional, then a bunch of Ts for people coming onto the floor for a possible fight. I do not see a foul on the player in white.

There is absolutely no attempt to get the ball. He takes both forearms into the player sitting on the floor. This is an intentional foul and like others have said, you get that call and the rest is moot.

Camron Rust

RefRich wrote
There is absolutely no attempt to get the ball. He takes both forearms into the player sitting on the floor. This is an intentional foul and like others have said, you get that call and the rest is moot.

Pushing a player out of the way in an attempt to get to the ball happens all the time. That is all that was. You get any call on that and the rest is moot.

jTheUmp

Rufus wrote
During camp last year they emphasized that loose balls are not an excuse for a free-for-all and that, if you get the first player piling on, you avoid a lot of grief later.

I don't know... I had a "coach whose been doing this for 20 years" tell me earlier this season that you couldn't foul anyone if the ball was loose. 🙄

Gotta admit, that took me off my game for a minute or so because I just couldn't figure out where he could've come up with that one.

Back on topic:
Definitely should've had a foul on the initial shove... I'd lean towards intentional myself.

If you don't call that, I think there could've been a backcourt violation a couple of seconds later, but it's close enough that I'd probably have passed on it. (Also, have fun with explaining to the coach why you called a best-eyes-in-the-game backcourt violation on his team 2 seconds after passing on one of his players getting shoved to the ground).

After that, we're in "sort out how many people are going to be disqualified" territory.

JRutledge

This is a perfect reason you need 3 person. An official at the very least would have been right on top of this play at the very least. That being said, I am shocked this was not called at some point with 2 person. This play was out in the open and the official moved his position and still did not see all the contact. Makes me wonder the experience level of the official as I cannot imagine letting any of this go because of what happen immediately after the play.

Now let us talk about what we do with the benches here? Are we ejecting anyone after nothing was originally called? It looks like the I see possibly 4 players come off the gold team bench (3 have warm ups that I can count) and I could make a case for about the same on the white bench, even though they are kind of in front of their bench. Now this appears to be the end of the quarter or half on some level, would that matter to anyone?

Peace

Rich

JRutledge wrote
This is a perfect reason you need 3 person. An official at the very least would have been right on top of this play at the very least. That being said, I am shocked this was not called at some point with 2 person. This play was out in the open and the official moved his position and still did not see all the contact. Makes me wonder the experience level of the official as I cannot imagine letting any of this go because of what happen immediately after the play.

Now let us talk about what we do with the benches here? Are we ejecting anyone after nothing was originally called? It looks like the I see possibly 4 players come off the gold team bench (3 have warm ups that I can count) and I could make a case for about the same on the white bench, even though they are kind of in front of their bench. Now this appears to be the end of the quarter or half on some level, would that matter to anyone?

Peace

My first thought:

If the crew is that unaware that they didn't get a foul on the play, there's no chance they're aware of who, if anyone, comes off the bench.

ballgame99

jTheUmp wrote
I don't know... I had a "coach whose been doing this for 20 years" tell me earlier this season that you couldn't foul anyone if the ball was loose. 🙄

Yep, I've heard that a couple times this season. "how is that a foul?!", "Coach, your guy dove into the other guy's knees (who was standing still)", "BUT IT WAS A LOOSE BALL!!" "Oh, well in that case... :rolleyes:"

On the OP, that first foul isn't even close and should be gotten 100/100 times. And if I have a good enough angle to see the defender bury an elbow in the kids ear in the process I would not have a problem with an intentional.

JRutledge

Rich wrote
My first thought:

If the crew is that unaware that they didn't get a foul on the play, there's no chance they're aware of who, if anyone, comes off the bench.

This crew's handling of this situation is a loss cause. But even if you called the foul you might have people come off the bench as it would take officials some time to get to them or likely stop a reaction. I was wondering about what we see and what we would do.

Peace