is this considered a Kick in basketball

[Eastshire]

I'm willing to be the contrarian here.

Kicking the ball is intentionally striking it with any part of the leg or foot.

If the defender closed his legs and then the ball handler throw the ball against his legs, there is no kicking violation.

Further, I think it's a stretch to convert closing legs to intentionally striking the ball. So, without the defender moving his legs towards the ball, I don't see how you could describe that as striking the ball as opposed to the ball striking the player, which is not a kicking violation.

So, as described in the OP (legs closed then pass) you cannot possibly have a kicking violation. If, as is more likely, the order was actually the reverse of that, you probably didn't have a violation as the ball likely struck the leg rather than the leg striking the ball.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I'm willing to be the contrarian here.



If the defender closed his legs and then the ball handler throw the ball against his legs, there is no kicking violation.

Further, I think it's a stretch to convert closing legs to intentionally striking the ball. So, without the defender moving his legs towards the ball, I don't see how you could describe that as striking the ball as opposed to the ball striking the player, which is not a kicking violation.

So, as described in the OP (legs closed then pass) you cannot possibly have a kicking violation. If, as is more likely, the order was actually the reverse of that, you probably didn't have a violation as the ball likely struck the leg rather than the leg striking the ball.

In the same situation, if the defender jumped with their legs spread and the pass hit the front of the thigh of the defender, would you also have no violation?

[grunewar]

Each play needs to be evaluated on it's own. HTBT.

If I determine it's intentional, I'll call a kicked ball. If I have to explain my call to a player or coach, if asked, I will.

If I determine it's not intentional, I'll hold my whistle, and explain that call too - if asked.

I'm not "pole vaulting mouse turds" here. Moving on.........

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by grunewar

Each play needs to be evaluated on it's own. HTBT.

If I determine it's intentional, I'll call a kicked ball. If I have to explain my call to a player or coach, if asked, I will.

If I determine it's not intentional, I'll hold my whistle, and explain that call too - if asked.

I'm not "pole vaulting mouse turds" here. Moving on.........

It's someone asking how to interpret a rule, which is certainly reasonable and creates discussion. If it's not of any value to you, why respond?

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by Smitty

It's someone asking how to interpret a rule, which is certainly reasonable and creates discussion. If it's not of any value to you, why respond?

Smitty - I'm not saying the conversation is not of value. I'm saying, like everything else we interpret, on this call, the official, in their mind, needs to determine if it's intentional contact, or not. Once that is done, make the call and be done with it.

When did a person close their legs and why? Before or after a pass?

Was it intentional contact or not - that is the question the official needs to determine?

Me, I am of the mind that a person can close their legs, before a pass, and the ball can hit their leg, and I can hold my whistle. If asked, I can explain it....and the game can move forward.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by Smitty

In the same situation, if the defender jumped with their legs spread and the pass hit the front of the thigh of the defender, would you also have no violation?

Did the ball strike the thigh or did the thigh strike the ball (and, if so, did the player intentionally strike the ball with the thigh)?

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Did the ball strike the thigh or did the thigh strike the ball (and, if so, did the player intentionally strike the ball with the thigh)?

I think you and I have a different idea of what determines intention. In this scenario, I don't think it matters whether the ball strikes the thigh or the thigh strikes the ball. You're splitting hairs. What matters (to me) is whether the defender was attempting to defend using their legs when the ball struck the leg. Once the ball comes in contact with any part of the leg at that point, it's a kicking violation (to me).

[Peeps]

Originally Posted by Smitty

I think you and I have a different idea of what determines intention. In this scenario, I don't think it matters whether the ball strikes the thigh or the thigh strikes the ball. You're splitting hairs. What matters (to me) is whether the defender was attempting to defend using their legs when the ball struck the leg. Once the ball comes in contact with any part of the leg at that point, it's a kicking violation (to me).

what exactly constitutes the leg, is it shin down. or from the waist down? (honest question)

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by Peeps

what exactly constitutes the leg, is it shin down. or from the waist down? (honest question)

The exact wording is in the rule book, which I don't have on me at the moment. But it extends all the way up the leg - thigh included. I believe it used to be more restrictive several years ago, but I don't recall the exact wording of the older rule either.

[Peeps]

Originally Posted by Smitty

The exact wording is in the rule book, which I don't have on me at the moment. But it extends all the way up the leg - thigh included. I believe it used to be more restrictive several years ago, but I don't recall the exact wording of the older rule either.

if you have played pickup i am sure you run into this just the same as we do. so basically if a player gets hit in the nether regions, since it hits part of the leg that would be considered to be a kick?

we have played in the past it is the knee down

Originally Posted by Peeps

what exactly constitutes the leg, is it shin down. or from the waist down? (honest question)

Well my friend let me tell you about something called the "Iron Triangle".

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by Smitty

I think you and I have a different idea of what determines intention. In this scenario, I don't think it matters whether the ball strikes the thigh or the thigh strikes the ball. You're splitting hairs. What matters (to me) is whether the defender was attempting to defend using their legs when the ball struck the leg. Once the ball comes in contact with any part of the leg at that point, it's a kicking violation (to me).

What should matter to you is what the rule says. If the defender does not intentionally strike the ball, it cannot be a kick.

I don't know what you mean by "attempting to defend using their legs." Do you mean by actively moving their legs? Or is it a certain leg position?

We have a specific definition for kicking. Let's use that.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

What should matter to you is what the rule says. If the defender does not intentionally strike the ball, it cannot be a kick.

I don't know what you mean by "attempting to defend using their legs." Do you mean by actively moving their legs? Or is it a certain leg position?

We have a specific definition for kicking. Let's use that.

I think I was pretty clear in how I interpret the rule, and it appears others do as well. We will have to agree to disagree.