[BillyMac]

Disclaimer: Below is not a NFHS interpretation, it's only an IAABO interpretation which obviously doesn't mean a hill of beans to most members of this Forum.

https://storage.googleapis.com/refqu...QALgGCr07W.mp4

IAABO Play Commentary

Correct Answer: This is not a foul.

This play demonstrates the importance of positioning to make accurate rulings. One of the most important concepts for ruling on rebound contact is the principle of verticality. (4-45) As the ball comes off the ring, there is contact between the two opponents in the lower spaces on the Trails side of the lane. Who was responsible for causing this contact? Which official had the best view?

The player (Gray #1) in the second space enters the lane and jumps vertically in an attempt to secure the rebound or to tap the ball. When you watch his movement, did he hinder or displace his opponent? The defensive rebounder (White #20) enters the lane, obtains a position, then moves back toward his airborne opponent. This is where the contact occurs. White #20 uses his lower torso and extends his right arm in an attempt to keep Gray #1 from securing the rebound. If there is a foul to be ruled on this play, it should be charged to White #20.

From the Lead's angle, Gray #1 is "on the back" is charged with a foul. The Trail official has a much better angle on the play and rules the contact to be incidental. The Lead should recognize his partner has a better angle and should "trust his partner" to rule on this contact.

It should be noted; the Trail was not properly positioned at the outset of the free throw. He was parallel to the free-throw line and did not have a good view of the top two spaces on the farther lane line. The Trail official should take a position approximately 3 feet behind the free-throw line extended and approximately halfway between the nearer free throw lane line and the sideline (IAABO manual pg 93). The Trail did close down toward the endline on the release and did end up in a good position to view the rebounding activity.

Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video: This is not a foul 86%. This is correctly ruled a foul 14% (including me).