[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

No it doesn't. I believe the quote is, "...and the subsequent contact takes A1 forcefully to the floor and out of bounds." Iow, the defender initiated the contact and as a result of the contact, A1 went to the floor. This case play seems to contradict the apparent "expectation" in some games that as long as the shot was blocked cleanly, the contact afterwards could be ignored.

I am not talking about the case play in question. I am talking about the people that want to find a situation that means a player that goes to the floor is a foul. I see that all the time and it is not called (and no one goes crazy). Just like I see an airborne shooter go hard into a defender and the defender does not move and we do not see a PC foul either. And that is not what the rules suggest, but it is not called that way for sure.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

No one has argued about a small guard bouncing off a large post player who has LGP, or a player running into well-set screen and getting creamed. We all agree incidental contact can be severe, and we all agree a player going to the floor does not mean a foul occurred.

LGP is not the only way we determine a foul. If a dribbler pushes off on a defender and displaces that defender, I do not care whether they are in LGP at the time of the contact. That is a guide to let us call a foul when contact takes place, but does not apply across the board on all kinds of plays or absolve the ball handler of being the cause of contact.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

You bring up handchecking in a previous post, and that actually is a point I wanted to make. You mentioned that handchecking was not called for years, with the expectation that as long as the player can "play through it", it was not going to be called a foul. The NFHS has clearly stated in recent POE's that officials have not been calling handchecking as often as they should. Perhaps in higher level boys' games, the expectation was/is that handchecking is a cheap foul and should not be called, where the rules committee has repeatedly said it needs to be called more often. Isn't this the same issue we have with the blocked shot and contact afterwards? There is an "expectation" in certain games that certain calls are made or not made, even though they may be in direct contradiction to the rules.

And I still call hand-checking when there is displacement and a player is put at a disadvantage. I do not call hand-checking and never will for a defender simply putting their hand on the ball handler. Oh, and the POEs almost never talk about the other rules that apply with incidental contact, but never change the rules to those rules. Actually I use the RSBQ philosophy to call hand-checking and anytime a player puts their hand on the dribbler that will get special attention, but not an automatic every time that action happens. And for the record I call a lot of hand-checking fouls as I use the RSBQ philosophy.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Maybe you're not understanding my questions - I'm not here necessarily to say one way is right and the other wrong. I know there are gray areas. But how do you tell a smaller school official what would be a foul in their game would not be a foul in a large-school game? Why is that? Yes, the "expectation" is different, but should we as officials give in to that expectation? If so, should we also give in to the expectation that a high dribble is somehow a violation? Everyone wants is called, and no one complains when it is. Same thing?

I do not think you understand my point either. I am not saying that I am not going to assume players that come together it is the fault of the defense. I am going to give the defense a lot of leeway on these plays as an offensive player is and can be out of control in these situations. And bigger players tend to knock over smaller players all the time and yes that is going to be a factor to me. And to equate a complete misunderstood rule to a philosophy to help cause consistency in a call is not the same thing. Again, this might be OK in certain games, but if you do this in others you will not work. Like my mom used to tell me often, you can be right and dead at the same time. If you call this and you never work I hope that rulebook makes you comfortable as you are watching (not you personally, but those that think that officiating is always about what is in the black and white of that rulebook). Just sharing what I have been taught, again I do not have to work with most here so anyone can choose to do what they want. But I have rarely ever seen a big 6'6" kid not knock over a kid much smaller than him when a player goes to the basket, so I choose to be very careful when calling this a foul. And this is one of many situations I am going to give the defense the benefit of the doubt unlike many officials I observe that do not know any better and call everything on the defense.

Out of all the years I have gone to camps, I have yet for anyone on these kinds of plays to tell me that when I passed on such a play to call a foul. I have had someone I worked with that called a foul told to let that go. That is telling to me as I have been all over the Midwest to officiating camps.

Peace