Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
1) B1 fouled the shooter. How do you ever know that the contact had no real influence on the play? And if a player puts a shooter into the third row, does that still have no real influence on the play if the shooter makes the basket? You can also foul an airborne shooter and never move them from their path. You can hit a wrist or elbow and knock the ball loose or make the shooter miss the shot, and that won't cause the airborne shooter to come down in any different spot than the one he was originally going to come down in. And there was already a defender with LGP in that spot?
2) Yes. And the defender was there before the shooter left his feet and never moved. And the defender with legal guarding position then gets knocked down and put into the third row by the charge.
Juggling Referee originally said that there shouldn't be a foul called on a shooter who was knocked off balance or into a defender. I agree with that fully. So did you and JRut. Juggler was talking about two different situations though. This situation refers to the play where the airborne shooter is definitely fouled but his path isn't changed one bet. He said that he wouldn't call a foul in the first situation, but he would in this situation. I'm just wondering if you and Jeff are still arguing about the first situation instead of the second.
|
Situation:
A1 is fouled in the act of shooting by B1 and makes contact with B2 who was in LGP.
It seems that we agree that, if the shooter is set off balance by the foul, then the second contact should be ignored.
Now let's concentrate on the dubious case: the foul by B1 doesn't change in a sensible way A1's path and doesn't put A1 off balance.
I say that we should think before calling B1's foul
and the charge by A1. I would be much more inclined to call only the charge and wave off the basket. Assuming, of course that the contact between A1 and B2 is substantial (for example, but not only, when B2 is knocked down). Such a situation seems more likely when the two contacts are almost simultaneous: in case of doubt on which happens first, I'd rather go with the charge.
I'm not saying we should ignore B1's contact in every situation like this, nor I'm saying to ignore contact on a shooter who is able to score anyway. I'm saying we must be careful and call
the foul (and I admit that at the end, in very special situations, it can be "the fouls").
It should definitely not be "different calls by two officials", do you agree?
Ciao