Shooting vs. passing after foul

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Rich

If it's close, I'm going with what is easiest to sell.

I don't think the second one is particularly close.

Your post implies that disagreeing on #2 means someone hasn't played at a high level. My point is that the level you PLAYED at is irrelevant to how well you officiate plays. I've worked with a few former D1 athletes who couldn't ref themselves out of a wet paper bag.

Jeff has unequivocally said that if a player after contact dumps the ball to a teammate it will always be a pass. That ignores the rule and the reality. As I said, pick a level. Contact can and has made many players in act and intending to shoot, dump. Again, saying a player who ends up dumping is always making a pass is simply wrong. Play 2 is obvious shot. I'll leave it to each here to decide what side they come down on.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BigCat

Jeff has unequivocally said that if a player after contact dumps the ball to a teammate it will always be a pass. That ignores the rule and the reality. As I said, pick a level. Contact can and has made many players in act and intending to shoot, dump. Again, saying a player who ends up dumping is always making a pass is simply wrong. Play 2 is obvious shot. I'll leave it to each here to decide what side they come down on.

It does not ignore the rule, it goes against the interpretation for sure. And I do not know many officials that call a lot of interpretations as written either. When you show me the official that calls a foul on the ball handler/shooter and then calls another foul for a "charge" making it a false double foul, that will be a first as well. But that interpretation is also in the casebook but I have yet to see anyone be that technical. You pick the first foul. So to me if a player wants a shooting foul, act like you are shooting. It is that simple. And play #2 is not an obvious shot. Heck you cannot even see where the foul is honestly. I do not know I would have called a foul. The camera is so far away, I cannot tell what the player was doing. But that is me. That is a play that in a camp I would ask about and have the officials justify his call.

Peace

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It does not ignore the rule, it goes against the interpretation for sure. And I do not know many officials that call a lot of interpretations as written either. When you show me the official that calls a foul on the ball handler/shooter and then calls another foul for a "charge" making it a false double foul, that will be a first as well. But that interpretation is also in the casebook but I have yet to see anyone be that technical. You pick the first foul. So to me if a player wants a shooting foul, act like you are shooting. It is that simple. And play #2 is not an obvious shot. Heck you cannot even see where the foul is honestly. I do not know I would have called a foul. The camera is so far away, I cannot tell what the player was doing. But that is me. That is a play that in a camp I would ask about and have the officials justify his call.

Peace

It's an obvious foul and an obvious shooting foul. Not even close.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BigCat

It's an obvious foul and an obvious shooting foul. Not even close.

The term "Obvious" is often subjective. So you think it is obvious and others do not. So I guess we will just have to disagree. And this call is so insignificant in the bigger picture, I am not going to lose sleep over this or any disagreement about this particular play. It is not like the play decided the game. And I doubt the coaches lost any sleep over it as well, either way.

Peace

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The term "Obvious" is often subjective. So you think it is obvious and others do not. So I guess we will just have to disagree. And this call is so insignificant in the bigger picture, I am not going to lose sleep over this or any disagreement about this particular play. It is not like the play decided the game. And I doubt the coaches lost any sleep over it as well, either way.

Peace

It was an obvious foul and an obvious shooting foul. Not even close.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BigCat

It was an obvious foul and an obvious shooting foul. Not even close.

And I do not agree with you. So what now? And others in this thread do not seem to agree with you. So now what?

Peace

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And I do not agree with you. So what now? And others in this thread do not seem to agree with you. So now what?

Peace

It was an obvious foul and an obvious shooting foul. Not even close.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And I do not agree with you. So what now? And others in this thread do not seem to agree with you. So now what?

Peace

I'm pretty sure you are the ONLY one not calling number 2 a shooting foul. (OTOH, I seem to be ALMOST the only one calling number 1 a shooting foul)