The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 13, 2016, 07:14am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Illinois
Posts: 862
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelvin green View Post
I think I'm going to disagree here... Swinging elbow that makes contact above the shoulders has to be called. Makes no difference if it is intentional act for not. Its going to be two shots and the ball. The only thing that's left is to determine if player is ejected.


If the ball is live, sure. But if the ball is dead because the first foul has already been called, I'm not sure it's automatic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 14, 2016, 10:56pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 1,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by bas2456 View Post
If the ball is live, sure. But if the ball is dead because the first foul has already been called, I'm not sure it's automatic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Elbow to head ... Live or dead has to be called...if you don't... There are upset coaches, retaliation, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 14, 2016, 11:18pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Illinois
Posts: 862
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelvin green View Post
Elbow to head ... Live or dead has to be called...if you don't... There are upset coaches, retaliation, etc.
Rule 10-4-7 (Player Technical) says a player should be charged with a technical if "intentionally or flagrantly contacting an opponent when the ball is dead and such contact is not a personal foul."

Obviously, if the contact is deemed to be either intentional or flagrant, address it accordingly.

My point is that I don't think the situation is absolute. If you would only call a player control foul if the ball were live, I wouldn't have a problem not calling a technical foul.

I understand I may be in the minority, and I understand that the "safe" thing to do would be to call the technical, but I'd better see clear intent if I'm hitting a kid with a dead ball contact technical.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 15, 2016, 07:44am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by bas2456 View Post
Rule 10-4-7 (Player Technical) says a player should be charged with a technical if "intentionally or flagrantly contacting an opponent when the ball is dead and such contact is not a personal foul."

Obviously, if the contact is deemed to be either intentional or flagrant, address it accordingly.

My point is that I don't think the situation is absolute. If you would only call a player control foul if the ball were live, I wouldn't have a problem not calling a technical foul.

I understand I may be in the minority, and I understand that the "safe" thing to do would be to call the technical, but I'd better see clear intent if I'm hitting a kid with a dead ball contact technical.
It's not the minority, it's flat out wrong. It has been stressed that elbow contact to the head IS a foul. Common/technical/flagrant. Therefore it cannot be ignored simply because the ball is dead. It has nothing to do with "safe". It has to do with expectations of the job. IF there is intent its a flagrant and not a technical.
__________________
in OS I trust
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 15, 2016, 08:35am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by deecee View Post
It's not the minority, it's flat out wrong. It has been stressed that elbow contact to the head IS a foul. Common/technical/flagrant. Therefore it cannot be ignored simply because the ball is dead. It has nothing to do with "safe". It has to do with expectations of the job. IF there is intent its a flagrant and not a technical.

Common / Intentional / Flagrant. Whether Personal or Technical. (Recognizing that "common Technical" is not really a defined term -- but it should be. )

If the ball is live, it's a flagrant personal. If the ball is dead, it's a flagrant Technical.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 15, 2016, 08:38am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
Common / Intentional / Flagrant. Whether Personal or Technical. (Recognizing that "common Technical" is not really a defined term -- but it should be. )

If the ball is live, it's a flagrant personal. If the ball is dead, it's a flagrant Technical.
you are right, i rushed through the response.
__________________
in OS I trust
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 15, 2016, 11:38am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by deecee View Post
It's not the minority, it's flat out wrong. It has been stressed that elbow contact to the head IS a foul. Common/technical/flagrant. Therefore it cannot be ignored simply because the ball is dead. It has nothing to do with "safe". It has to do with expectations of the job. IF there is intent its a flagrant and not a technical.
If it is deemed common, it can and should be ignored if the ball is dead.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 15, 2016, 02:02pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
If it is deemed common, it can and should be ignored if the ball is dead.
I disagree with elbow contact to the head being ignored in this case and so do my local and college assignors. The FED and NCAA have made it clear that contact to the head is not to be ignored, and they have been very clear and succinct with the message.
__________________
in OS I trust
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 15, 2016, 04:55pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 23,401
Contact Above Shoulders ...

2012-13 NFHS POINTS OF EMPHASIS

2. Contact above the shoulders. With a continued emphasis on reducing concussions and decreasing excessive contact situations the committee determined that more guidance is needed for penalizing contact above the shoulders.

a. A player shall not swing his/her arm(s) or elbow(s) even without contacting an opponent. Excessive swinging of the elbows occurs when arms and elbows are swung about while using the shoulders as pivots, and the speed of the extended arms and elbows is in excess of the rest of the body as it rotates on the hips or on the pivot foot. Currently it is a violation in Rule 9 Section 13 Article.

b. Examples of illegal contact above the shoulders and resulting penalties.
1. Contact with a stationary elbow may be incidental or a common foul.
2. An elbow in movement but not excessive should be an intentional foul.
3. A moving elbow that is excessive can be either an intentional foul or flagrant personal foul.

4-19-1-Note: Contact after the ball has become dead is ignored unless it is ruled intentional or flagrant ...
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

“I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36)

Last edited by BillyMac; Thu Dec 15, 2016 at 05:00pm.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 15, 2016, 05:30pm
beware big brother
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: illinois
Posts: 996
Quote:
Originally Posted by deecee View Post
I disagree with elbow contact to the head being ignored in this case and so do my local and college assignors. The FED and NCAA have made it clear that contact to the head is not to be ignored, and they have been very clear and succinct with the message.
Before this season, I would most likely have agreed with you. However, in NCAA-M, we are now instructed to determine the position of the forearms (vertical vs. horizontal) of the offensive player when officiating these plays. If the offensive player's forearms are more vertical than horizontal, the foul would be on the defensive player for violating the cylinder of the offensive player. This is a common foul on the defense. I would apply these same rules to dead ball contact as well. If the offensive player's forearms are vertical and contact is made above the defensive player's shoulders, this would be a common foul on the defense. Therefore, it should not automatically be a technical or flagrant technical foul on the offense just because the ball is dead.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 15, 2016, 06:42pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by deecee View Post
I disagree with elbow contact to the head being ignored in this case and so do my local and college assignors. The FED and NCAA have made it clear that contact to the head is not to be ignored, and they have been very clear and succinct with the message.
They did say that. After numerous silly results they backed off of that quite a bit, however.

And even before relaxing the interpretations, they (as indicated in the POEs posted by Billy) still allowed for a common foul involving elbows and the head. Several jurisdictions, and I think the NFHS too, clarified of what was meant by "movement" ruling that an elbow not moving relative to the body was just a common foul.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association

Last edited by Camron Rust; Thu Dec 15, 2016 at 06:45pm.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 15, 2016, 11:58pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
If it is deemed common, it can and should be ignored if the ball is dead.
The poster said the player swung the elbow and hit him. Under the POE, that is an elbow in movement. Even if offense doesn't mean it, it's intentional by rule. Should not be ignored cause happened while ball dead. Under the POE as written it cannot be a common foul.

Again, I'll call it however they want, but I have not seen anything saying that can be considered a common foul. If elbow moving itself, or because body pivots it is still moving. I don't search a lot of things so I'm not saying there isn't something there. I just haven't seen it and wouldn't know where to look. Illinois had slides for its rules meeting saying same thing as POE. They have not issued any other statewide interpretation. I certainly would like the ability to call a common foul when the elbow is moving in a normal way, say on a pass) but I haven't seen anything allowing me to do it.

Last edited by BigCat; Fri Dec 16, 2016 at 12:01am.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Fri Dec 16, 2016, 04:11am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCat View Post
The poster said the player swung the elbow and hit him. Under the POE, that is an elbow in movement. Even if offense doesn't mean it, it's intentional by rule. Should not be ignored cause happened while ball dead. Under the POE as written it cannot be a common foul.
Agree...swing = intentional (at a minimum) which then becomes a T.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCat View Post
Again, I'll call it however they want, but I have not seen anything saying that can be considered a common foul. If elbow moving itself, or because body pivots it is still moving. I don't search a lot of things so I'm not saying there isn't something there. I just haven't seen it and wouldn't know where to look. Illinois had slides for its rules meeting saying same thing as POE. They have not issued any other statewide interpretation. I certainly would like the ability to call a common foul when the elbow is moving in a normal way, say on a pass) but I haven't seen anything allowing me to do it.
At least at the NCAA, you only have to watch a number of the replays from this year and last year that clearly show elbow contact with a moving elbow where they come away with nothing or no upgrade. In the first year of the elbow updates, a large number of the same plays were ruled intentional. Now, unless it is a swing, they go with a common foul or, if not called initially, nothing.

And in our state, they gave the interpretation a while back that I suggested above....moving in a normal play is just a normal play and common. Moving faster than the body (excessive swinging) is an intentional. If it is vicious or targeted, it goes flagrant.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association

Last edited by Camron Rust; Fri Dec 16, 2016 at 04:17am.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Missed 2nd FT Mel and weet Basketball 4 Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:48am
One of Our Own Will be Missed Here SAump Baseball 2 Mon Apr 23, 2012 04:28pm
Missed it Rufus Basketball 20 Wed Nov 23, 2011 10:01am
Missed Plate Lapopez Baseball 7 Mon Jun 23, 2008 08:40am
85% missed this one lawump Baseball 69 Thu Feb 28, 2008 10:23pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:51am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1