The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Purdue @ Indiana Plays (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/100957-purdue-indiana-plays.html)

JRutledge Tue Feb 23, 2016 02:51pm

Purdue @ Indiana Plays
 
Play 1: You do not see this every day at the higher levels.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/2pOeXIJiH6U" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Play 2:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vUeo9exeBGk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Play 3:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/kAMZCiwzPfw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Play 4:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/JG1l2Ltrj7Y" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

Camron Rust Wed Feb 24, 2016 02:36am

#1-3, not much to discuss. Properly called.

#4, if that is going to be called, the defensive armbar that preceded it should have probably been called instead. That said, that seemed like a pretty weak call either way.

JRutledge Wed Feb 24, 2016 02:56am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 982163)
#1-3, not much to discuss. Properly called.

#4, if that is going to be called, the defensive armbar that preceded it should have probably been called instead. That said, that seemed like a pretty weak call either way.

His so-called arm-bar did not affect anything. He was getting his arm mostly out of the way. That is not how it is expected to be called from my point of view.

Peace

Nevadaref Wed Feb 24, 2016 04:32am

The last time that I recall #1 occurring in an NCAAM game of significance was the 2004 Sweet 16 between Georgia Tech and Nevada.

JetMetFan Wed Feb 24, 2016 05:51am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 982163)
#4, if that is going to be called, the defensive armbar that preceded it should have probably been called instead. That said, that seemed like a pretty weak call either way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 982166)
His so-called arm-bar did not affect anything. He was getting his arm mostly out of the way. That is not how it is expected to be called from my point of view.

I don't know how NCAAM wants it called but all I know is that's rule 10-4-1a (Keeping a hand or forearm on an opponent with the ball). If we don't get those on my side we hear about it. Repeatedly.

Mr.C Wed Feb 24, 2016 07:17am

I've never seen anything close to #1 at HS or NCAA-----happens all the time at middle school, they must teach it at practice. I didn't think the defensive arm hindered the dribbler before the push off.

JRutledge Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:37am

Quote:

Originally Posted by JetMetFan (Post 982170)
I don't know how NCAAM wants it called but all I know is that's rule 10-4-1a (Keeping a hand or forearm on an opponent with the ball). If we don't get those on my side we hear about it. Repeatedly.

I have never been told in a play like this to have a call other than a coach, who you have to listen to with a grain of salt. The player extends his arm without touching the ball handler and as the ball handler comes towards him his arm comes close to his own body. The arm in no way even influenced any RSBQ or prevented the ball handler from any movement in any way.

When I posted this video what you are saying should be called did not even cross my mind. There have been 10 bulletins at least posted by the NCAA and never saw any play that said we should have a foul on the ball handler in a play like this that I can remember.

Peace

JetMetFan Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:46am

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 982204)
I have never been told in a play like this to have a call other than a coach, who you have to listen to with a grain of salt. The player extends his arm without touching the ball handler and as the ball handler comes towards him his arm comes close to his own body. The arm in no way even influenced any RSBQ or prevented the ball handler from any movement in any way.

When I posted this video what you are saying should be called did not even cross my mind. There have been 10 bulletins at least posted by the NCAA and never saw any play that said we should have a foul on the ball handler in a play like this that I can remember.

That would be the difference. RSBQ doesn't matter on my side in that situation. Put it on and leave it on = whistle. We still have to judge whether the BH/D moved into the arm/hand or vice versa but on that one the first thing that came to mind for me was hand check.

JRutledge Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:59am

Quote:

Originally Posted by JetMetFan (Post 982205)
That would be the difference. RSBQ doesn't matter on my side in that situation. Put it on and leave it on = whistle. We still have to judge whether the BH/D moved into the arm/hand or vice versa but on that one the first thing that came to mind for me was hand check.

I am just telling you that this is not a play I hear any grief about because the defender was retreating his arm and not using it in any way. Never have I called a foul that close as you suggest in college or high school. If the defender kept his arm out from his body then yes I would agree it was a foul, but that is not what happened.

Peace

Camron Rust Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:03pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 982166)
His so-called arm-bar did not affect anything. He was getting his arm mostly out of the way. That is not how it is expected to be called from my point of view.

Peace

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.C (Post 982171)
I've never seen anything close to #1 at HS or NCAA-----happens all the time at middle school, they must teach it at practice. I didn't think the defensive arm hindered the dribbler before the push off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 982207)
I am just telling you that this is not a play I hear any grief about because the defender was retreating his arm and not using it in any way. Never have I called a foul that close as you suggest in college or high school. If the defender kept his arm out from his body then yes I would agree it was a foul, but that is not what happened.

Peace

My point was that he pushoff was very weak and was preceded by a play that has been clearly defined as an automatic foul, even if it too was weak. No way I'm calling THAT pushoff and not calling the armbar before it.....but I'm probably not calling amrbar for the reasons stated and, thus, I'm not calling the pushoff. It would be completely unfair to the offensive player too call his contact a foul in the presence of the defensive armbar, even if it was a soft one.

JRutledge Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:11pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 982217)
My point was that he pushoff was very weak and was preceded by a play that has been clearly defined as an automatic foul, even if it too was weak. No way I'm calling THAT pushoff and not calling the armbar before it.....but I'm probably not calling amrbar for the reasons stated and, thus, I'm not calling the pushoff. It would be completely unfair to the offensive player too call his contact a foul in the presence of the defensive armbar, even if it was a soft one.

I am very aware of what your point is, I just happened to disagree with your point based on previous videos and previous stances from the NCAA on these matters.

And an armbar is when the arm is to keep you at bay and this did not do that IMO or judgment. Players have arms and usually they are going to go in front of their body at some point. It is not the expectation to never touch the ball handler. Just like it would not be a foul on the ball handler if he arm is out and he touches the defender, you have to do a little more than a touch. Never has the NCAA Men's side took such an "absolute" position.

Peace

jpgc99 Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:27pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JetMetFan (Post 982205)
That would be the difference. RSBQ doesn't matter on my side in that situation. Put it on and leave it on = whistle. We still have to judge whether the BH/D moved into the arm/hand or vice versa but on that one the first thing that came to mind for me was hand check.

These are automatic on the men's side, too, regardless of RSBQ. However, "put it on and leave it on" is not how I would describe this play. I don't have a foul for a handcheck here for that reason.

walt Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:46pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JetMetFan (Post 982170)
I don't know how NCAAM wants it called but all I know is that's rule 10-4-1a (Keeping a hand or forearm on an opponent with the ball). If we don't get those on my side we hear about it. Repeatedly.

I agree. On our side of the NCAA, the extended arm bar by the defender should have been called. Actually we probably would have seen an email or video telling us it must be called.

jdd1172 Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:56pm

or call a travel

jeremy341a Wed Feb 24, 2016 03:40pm

I don't see the push off as weak. He cleared space. I don't view the arm bar as an automatic as mainly the offense moved into the arm and the arm was pulled back. That to me isn't keeping an arm bar on an opponent.

deecee Wed Feb 24, 2016 04:31pm

Here we are told 10-4-1 all day too. That arm bar was extended and much like 2 hands, or constant jabbing is "supposed" to be an automatic.

Armbar NOT withstanding that push off isn't minor and by itself is a PC foul. You have full extension by the ball handler into the defender to clear space (and a lot of it).

Most likely I would have the PC as well versus the handcheck simply for the fact that while I was processing 10-4-1 the push happened and it was WAY more obvious.

Camron Rust Thu Feb 25, 2016 02:17am

Quote:

Originally Posted by deecee (Post 982251)
Here we are told 10-4-1 all day too. That arm bar was extended and much like 2 hands, or constant jabbing is "supposed" to be an automatic.

Armbar NOT withstanding that push off isn't minor and by itself is a PC foul. You have full extension by the ball handler into the defender to clear space (and a lot of it).

Most likely I would have the PC as well versus the handcheck simply for the fact that while I was processing 10-4-1 the push happened and it was WAY more obvious.

Absent the contact from the defender's arm (yes, that was an armbar anyway yo slice it), you probably wouldn't have the pushoff. Call the first foul. I'm not calling the PC if I'm not calling the armbar.

JRutledge Thu Feb 25, 2016 02:34am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 982294)
Absent the contact from the defender's arm (yes, that was an armbar anyway yo slice it), you probably wouldn't have the pushoff. Call the first foul. I'm not calling the PC if I'm not calling the armbar.

Here is the Men's Rules

10-1-4
  • a. Keeping a hand or forearm on an opponent
  • b. Putting two hands on an opponent
  • c. Continually jabbing an opponent by extending an arm(s) and placing a hand or forearm on the opponent
  • d. Using an arm bar to impede the progress of the dribbler

None of these rules references happened on this play. The arm did not in any way impede the progress of the dribbler. He was going in one direction and he never was prevented from going in that direction.

The rule does not say "touching" is a foul. The contact has to do something. Even "b" has to be the defender actively putting their hands on the dribbler, not just retreating your hands that are likely in front of your body.

Now if you can show me a bulletin example I might agree with you. But I have not seen any such reference that suggest this play is a foul.

Peace

deecee Thu Feb 25, 2016 08:56am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 982294)
Absent the contact from the defender's arm (yes, that was an armbar anyway yo slice it), you probably wouldn't have the pushoff. Call the first foul. I'm not calling the PC if I'm not calling the armbar.

2 wrongs don't make a right and that pushoff is pretty advantageous and severe.

jpgc99 Thu Feb 25, 2016 10:17am

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 982296)
Here is the Men's Rules

10-1-4
  • a. Keeping a hand or forearm on an opponent
  • b. Putting two hands on an opponent
  • c. Continually jabbing an opponent by extending an arm(s) and placing a hand or forearm on the opponent
  • d. Using an arm bar to impede the progress of the dribbler

None of these rules references happened on this play. The arm did not in any way impede the progress of the dribbler. He was going in one direction and he never was prevented from going in that direction.

The rule does not say "touching" is a foul. The contact has to do something. Even "b" has to be the defender actively putting their hands on the dribbler, not just retreating your hands that are likely in front of your body.

Now if you can show me a bulletin example I might agree with you. But I have not seen any such reference that suggest this play is a foul.

Peace

I agree 100% with everything JRut wrote. Touching is not a foul. I do not see any illegal contact initiated by the defense.

Camron Rust Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:43am

Quote:

Originally Posted by deecee (Post 982311)
2 wrongs don't make a right and that pushoff is pretty advantageous and severe.

A defender putting his arm out across the front of the dribbler is one of the thing that they want called....preventing the freedom of movement. I don't blame offensive players from pushing off if they are illegally being held back.

JRutledge Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:47am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 982331)
A defender putting his arm out across the front of the dribbler is one of the thing that they want called....preventing the freedom of movement. I don't blame offensive players from pushing off if they are illegally being held back.

OK and you call that and you will feel better.

Peace

Camron Rust Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:57am

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 982332)
OK and you call that and you will feel better.

Peace

It is not about feeling better. It is about calling what I'm told to call.

JRutledge Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:59am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 982340)
It is not about feeling better. It is about calling what I'm told to call.

Well I work college and I have not been told to call that. And I am still looking for the video that suggests this particular play is a foul that must be called. All the videos I see the arm extends and stays extended, not just a touch when nothing is changed. And the NCAA has the "cylinder" philosophy and this did not even violate that principle.

Peace


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:11am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1