I had no idea what to call....

[Dad]

B1 is making a drive to the hoop. A1 is coming over to defend and it's blatantly obvious when contact occurs it's going to be a block. Before the block can occur B1 holds the ball out in front with two arms and runs it into A1. A1 continues to move forward and the force pushes B1 to the ground. B1 wildly throws the ball in an attempt to pass before falling and it goes right to A2. B1 takes a tumble. Note, the only contact was A1 running into the ball and not into B1.

Would anyone have a whistle here for anything, ever? I just thought, well that was interesting, and ran down to officiate the next play.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Dad

B1 is making a drive to the hoop. A1 is coming over to defend and it's blatantly obvious when contact occurs it's going to be a block. Before the block can occur B1 holds the ball out in front with two arms and runs it into A1. A1 continues to move forward and the force pushes B1 to the ground. B1 wildly throws the ball in an attempt to pass before falling and it goes right to A2. B1 takes a tumble. Note, the only contact was A1 running into the ball and not into B1.

Would anyone have a whistle here for anything, ever? I just thought, well that was interesting, and ran down to officiate the next play.

Did B1 travel while holding it out and running into A1?

If not, probably a good no-call if all the contact was on the ball and it wasn't unsporting.

Pedantic advice: it helps if we keep A on offense. It's not really necessary, but it's just what we're used to so it's easier to read. Take that for what it's worth.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Adam

Did B1 travel while holding it out and running into A1?

If not, probably a good no-call if all the contact was on the ball and it wasn't unsporting.

Pedantic advice: it helps if we keep A on offense. It's not really necessary, but it's just what we're used to so it's easier to read. Take that for what it's worth.

Will follow the advice. When writing it I just treated A as home and B as visitor.

I can't be 100%(Maybe 90%) sure he didn't travel, was too busy wondering what on earth one of the better players in the state was thinking instead of drawing the foul.

[deecee]

It's these ugly plays that throw me off. I pause, think did the defense do anything wrong? Then just play on. These also get the howler monkeys on the bench up with the usual, "Whaaars the fooooul?" and "Call it both ways."

Sometimes it's just ugly.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by deecee

It's these ugly plays that throw me off. I pause, think did the defense do anything wrong? Then just play on. These also get the howler monkeys on the bench and in the stands up with the usual, "Whaaars the fooooul?" and "Call it both ways."

Sometimes it's just ugly.

Fixed it for you.

[Camron Rust]

No call.....defender contacted the ball and only the ball. Hard to have anything on that.

[ODog]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

No call.....defender contacted the ball and only the ball. Hard to have anything on that.

Completely different scenario than OP, and one I'm sure has been discussed on here, but what about if A1 uses the ball to push B1 out of the way? Not necessarily under the circumstances of the OP, but just in general.

Player control foul?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by ODog

Completely different scenario than OP, and one I'm sure has been discussed on here, but what about if A1 uses the ball to push B1 out of the way? Not necessarily under the circumstances of the OP, but just in general.

Player control foul?

You will find some debate over this one....but I say yes. Using the ball as a tool to push is not within the spirit of the rules.

[Rich]

This kind of play is where my traveling radar goes waaaaaaay up.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Rich

This kind of play is where my traveling radar goes waaaaaaay up.

Do all the bells ring and does an image of godzilla show up on the screen?

[BlueDevilRef]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

You will find some debate over this one....but I say yes. Using the ball as a tool to push is not within the spirit of the rules.

I remember the discussion from when I was a lurker. I agree. Pushing off is pushing off, ball or not.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

You will find some debate over this one....but I say yes. Using the ball as a tool to push is not within the spirit of the rules.

You can defend calling a technical foul, but not a personal foul for pushing or charging.

What kind of foul would you call if a player threw the ball at an opponent during a live ball situation? This is still contact with the ball. The type of foul needs to be the same.

There is even a Case Book play with a player throwing the ball into an opponent's face. The ruling is that the official needs to use judgment to determine if it merits a technical foul or not.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

You can defend calling a technical foul, but not a personal foul for pushing or charging.

What kind of foul would you call if a player threw the ball at an opponent during a live ball situation? This is still contact with the ball. The type of foul needs to be the same.

There is even a Case Book play with a player throwing the ball into an opponent's face. The ruling is that the official needs to use judgment to determine if it merits a technical foul or not.

I don't think I know of anywhere that says such contact must be with the player's body. It just says contact. Is the distinction really any different than a player pushing someone with their butt since it was only their clothes that contacted the opponent and not their body.

It could also be covered under the rough tactics clause.

Throwing the ball at an opponents face is an unsportsmanlike foul, live ball or dead ball.

Shoving a player out of the way is just that....with the ball or otherwise.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I don't think I know of anywhere that says such contact must be with the player's body. It just says contact. Is the distinction really any different than a player pushing someone with their butt since it was only their clothes that contacted the opponent and not their body.

There is an NFHS ruling which states that a player's clothing and hair are part of the player. This is why holding a shirt is a foul or a ponytail touching OOB is a violation if the player has the ball.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

It could also be covered under the rough tactics clause.

It may warrant a technical foul. Otherwise, I don't agree that it is covered in this part of the rules.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Throwing the ball at an opponents face is an unsportsmanlike foul, live ball or dead ball.

Exactly my point and the NFHS definition of an unsporting foul is a NON-CONTACT foul. Therefore, the NFHS considers ball to player interaction to be non-contact. Player to player interaction is contact in the NFHS understanding.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Shoving a player out of the way is just that....with the ball or otherwise.

I respectfully disagree.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Dad

B1 is making a drive to the hoop. A1 is coming over to defend and it's blatantly obvious when contact occurs it's going to be a block. Before the block can occur B1 holds the ball out in front with two arms and runs it into A1. A1 continues to move forward and the force pushes B1 to the ground. B1 wildly throws the ball in an attempt to pass before falling and it goes right to A2. B1 takes a tumble. Note, the only contact was A1 running into the ball and not into B1.

Would anyone have a whistle here for anything, ever? I just thought, well that was interesting, and ran down to officiate the next play.

Originally Posted by Adam

Did B1 travel while holding it out and running into A1?

If not, probably a good no-call if all the contact was on the ball and it wasn't unsporting.

Pedantic advice: it helps if we keep A on offense. It's not really necessary, but it's just what we're used to so it's easier to read. Take that for what it's worth.

Dad:

Two points:

1) I want to second Adam's Pedantic Advice.

2) Nothing is blatantly obvious. I know that a picture, or in the case of officiating, a video is worth one thousand words, but when verbally describing a play one must be as accurate as possible. While we should be aware of what the players are doing on the court, we should never anticipate an in fraction of the rules.

From your description I do not know what A1 (the defensive player) and B1 (the offensive player) are really doing.

Some of the questions that need to be asked before one can address your play are:

a) Had A1 obtained (NFHS)/established (NCAA and FIBA) a LGP and then started to move obliquely towards B1?

b) Had A1 obtained (NFHS)/established (NCAA and FIBA) a LGP and then started to move obliquely away from B1? One must remember that the A1 (the defensive player in your OP) does not have to give Time and Distance when obtaining/establishing a LGP against B1(the offensive player in your OP).

c) Was B1 dribbling the ball prior to the "contact" between himself and A1 or had B1 caught a pass and was utilizing legal foot movements while in Control of the ball?

I hope you see where I am headed based upon some of the questions that I have posted.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

No call.....defender contacted the ball and only the ball. Hard to have anything on that.

Originally Posted by ODog

Completely different scenario than OP, and one I'm sure has been discussed on here, but what about if A1 uses the ball to push B1 out of the way? Not necessarily under the circumstances of the OP, but just in general.

Player control foul?

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

You will find some debate over this one....but I say yes. Using the ball as a tool to push is not within the spirit of the rules.

Originally Posted by deecee

Do all the bells ring and does an image of godzilla show up on the screen?

deecee:

I love this picture.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

You can defend calling a technical foul, but not a personal foul for pushing or charging.

What kind of foul would you call if a player threw the ball at an opponent during a live ball situation? This is still contact with the ball. The type of foul needs to be the same.

There is even a Case Book play with a player throwing the ball into an opponent's face. The ruling is that the official needs to use judgment to determine if it merits a technical foul or not.

Addressing Camron, Nevada, and ODog's posts. There have been many thread in the Forum where the contact described has been discussed.

My personal opinion is to take a fluid approach to the situation. It is too early in the morning for me (especially after the long day that MTD, Jr., and I had on the court in a youth tournament yesterday) to get into a detailed discussion of my position. But proponents of each side of the debate make valid points and absent a decision by the NFHS and NCAA Men's and Women's Committees we may never come to a definitive answer.

HAPPY VALENTINES DAY!!

MTD, Sr.