[BillyMac]

Disclaimer: For IAABO eyes only. 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...w%2B0UYg%3D%3D

IAABO Play Commentary Correct Answer: This is a foul for illegal contact.

When the NFHS first adopted the rebounding rule (4-37), it was derived from the guarding rule 4-23. Officials need to understand specific guidelines for a player to obtain a legal rebounding position.

To obtain or maintain a legal rebounding position, a player may not:
a. Displace, charge or push an opponent.
b. Extend shoulders, hips, knees, or extend the arms or elbows fully or partially in a position other than vertical so that the freedom of movement of an opponent is hindered when contact with the arms or elbows occurs.
c. Bend his/her body in an abnormal position to hold or displace an opponent.
d. Violate the principle of verticality.

In this play, White #20 is moving into the lane when he displaces Red #10. This contact impacted Red #10's ability to secure the rebound and was correctly ruled a foul by the Center official.

In this play, the Center's primary responsibility is to stay with the shooter, making an attempt near the sideline in her PCA. After she is confident the shooter is back to the floor without being contacted by the defender, she turns her attention back toward the lane and observes the illegal contact. With the Center having a try from her PCA, The Trail official should be responsible for the flight of the ball and any infractions at the ring. The Lead should stay focused on the rebounders and be responsible for any illegal contact in the lane area. (IAABO Manual p. 158-159)

Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video: This is a foul for illegal contact 86% (including me). This is not a foul and the play should have continued 14%.