Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac
High school boys varsity game, so only NFHS rule apply.
Defender White 33 accidentally trips and falls to the ground, with his body, basically, on the lane line. White 33 doesn't extend arms, legs, or hips, nor does he roll over. A split second later, offensive player Red 22 drives to the basket, tripping over White 33's head, while his head was prone on the floor. Official charges a blocking foul on White 33. Is the official correct?
Here are some relevant citations:
10-6-1: A player shall not hold, push, charge, trip or impede the progress
of an opponent by extending arm(s), shoulder(s), hip(s) or knee(s), or by
bending his/her body into other than a normal position; nor use any rough tactics.
4-23-1: Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an
offensive opponent. …Every player is entitled to a spot on the playing court provided such player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent.
10.6.1E (NFHS 2004-05): B1 attempts to steal the ball from stationary A1 who is holding the ball. B1 misses the ball and falls to the floor. In dribbling away, A1 contacts' B1's leg, loses control of the ball and falls to the floor. RULING: No infraction or foul has occurred and play continues. Unless B1 made an effrot to trip or block A1, he/she is entitled to a position on the court even if it is momentarily lying on the floor after falling down.
IAABO (not NFHS) Interpretation (January 2015):A1 and B1 both jump in an attempt to rebound a missed try. A1 secures the rebound as B1 loses his/her balance and falls to floor behind A1. A1 spins to begin a dribble contacts B1 and falls. Is this a travel on A1 or foul on B1? Ruling: This is a blocking foul on B1. Although B1 fell to the floor, he/she did not obtain a legal guarding position, which requires an opponent to initially face a player with 2 feet on playing court and the front of the torso must be facing the opponent (Rule 4-23-2).
4-23-2: To obtain an initial legal guarding position:
a. The guard must have both feet touching the playing court.
b. The front of the guard’s torso must be facing the opponent.
|
I'm not a fan of the 2004/05 NFHS interpretation you have set out above. The NCAA interpretation of the same play is a block. I dont believe the NFHS interpretation is supported by the rules AND, I cant for the life of me, figure out in that play scenario, why they feel it necessary to protect that player. He tried to make a steal, missed and fell--unsuccessful at everything. He falls which causes offense to trip, lose ball. He didnt mean to do it but he still caused a player to trip.
In your play above white 33 was standing up at one point. He falls into path of offense and a SPLIT SECOND later red player trips over his head. loses ball. Whether white 33 meant to fall or not, did or did not intentionally try to trip red, the fact is white has gained an advantage. If white 33 is standing up and his right foot slips out to the right and a split second later red trips over that foot i'm calling a block. His foot went outside of his cylinder into the path of the defender. Why would we let a player who uses his head do the same thing and not have a foul?
I believe the statement in the play that every player is entitled to a position on the floor if they get there first, even if lying down is wrong and really doesnt have any support in the rules. Every place in the rules when legal postions are discussed, some of which you have cited above, player is standing and required to stay within his cylinder. Cant extend arms, elbows. must be shoulder width apart. FT lane spots are 3 feet wide. The language in the rules is every player is entitled to a spot on the floor. That is in the guarding rule and rebounding rule. Both of those discuss legal postions being standing...And the obvious, basketball is played standing up.
So why protect the player who has fallen and penalize a player who has the ball legally going to the basket? I could say in some situations that contact with the player on the ground is incidental, or "no harm no foul," but, when the ball is involved and it causes a team to lose the ball, that should be a block.
As to why the NFHS play was removed from the case book, who knows? I'd like to think they realized it was wrong.