PC foul without a falling player (Video)

[MatthewPV]

I know "set" is not a requirement for a defender. After a 2nd...and 3rd look...I stand corrected. The defender is moving laterally therefore isn't in violation.

[ballgame99]

Great call! This isn't a play where the offensive guy just bounces off a legal defender, he knocked the defender back several feet. So you can't say the defender wasn't disadvantaged here. He took a pretty good shot in the chest and played legal defense. This is a call I would expect to get a hard time from a coach on, but I would hope I wouldn't hear about it from an evaluator that knows the rules.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by MatthewPV

I know "set" is not a requirement for a defender. After a 2nd...and 3rd look...I stand corrected. The defender is moving laterally therefore isn't in violation.

I was a little more snarky than I needed to be.

[VaTerp]

I'd prefer a no call here and think the official may have anticipated a little and/or not been patient enough with his whistle.

That said, let's dispel the notion that a player needs to fall in order for it to be a PC.

[Rich]

I'm just going with expectations -- it's likely that the mythical evaluator would say that neither player really did anything wrong -- that the contact "wasn't enough."

I feel if this trips my trigger then it means that my filter is going to be set too sensitively the rest of the game.

[MD Longhorn]

I think I would have leaned against calling it myself ... but would not ding a guy on an eval for calling it.

[packersowner]

Looking at my 2012-2013 case book, there are two cases cited 4.23.2 and 4.23.3 where the case discusses "contact" to the torso, both rulings state player control foul.

I think the argument most are having is, how much contact warrants a player control foul? Why do we let the offense make contact but the minute an offensive player touches with two hands, its hand checking and a foul. I think a lot of us have been conditioned to allow the offense to have the advantage. I don't have a problem with this call, its defensible.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I think I would have leaned against calling it myself ... but would not ding a guy on an eval for calling it.

Right.

Problem is, then I'd expect this level of contact/displacement to be called by the entire crew every time. Right?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by packersowner

I think the argument most are having is, how much contact warrants a player control foul? Why do we let the defense make contact but the minute an offensive player touches with two hands, its hand checking and a foul. I think a lot of us have been conditioned to allow the offense to have the advantage. I don't have a problem with this call, its defensible.

FIFY.

And, it's because there's a specific rule on it.

If they added a specific rule that "contact by a dribbler to the torso of a defensive player with LGP is an automatic foul" then the play here would be a foul.

I agree with those above who say this could go either way -- and we don't know what else had been happening in this game or the expectations of that area.

[JRutledge]

I actually like the call. I think it is very close, but I would call that and have called that. I do not need a defender to fall to be OK with the call.

BTW, this led to a T on the coach of the team that had a PC foul called on. But that is just more context, but thought I would show only the play in question first.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I actually like the call. I think it is very close, but I would call that and have called that. I do not need a defender to fall to be OK with the call.

BTW, this led to a T on the coach of the team that had a PC foul called on. But that is just more context, but thought I would show only the play in question first.

Peace

I think I want to see the T.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich

I think I want to see the T.

Give me some time and I can post the video.

Peace

[OKREF]

Saw a call a Tuesday night. Defender is legal, never moves, offensive player driving by the defense and they hit shoulder to shoulder. Official called a block. I asked myself what the defender did wrong. I know it wasn't technically torso to torso, however I had a hard time with the block here. My opinion was a PC, or a pass.

[SWMOzebra]

My first choice here would be a patient whistle and a no-call. Yes, I agree with those who say the defender was disadvantaged by being driven under the basket ... but the offensive player ended up on the ground, so I'm having trouble seeing exactly what advantage he gained from the contact.

All this being said, if you're going to have a whistle here then PC is the right call.

No way this is a blocking foul, the defender did nothing wrong here.

[jeremy341a]

Originally Posted by SWMOzebra

My first choice here would be a patient whistle and a no-call. Yes, I agree with those who say the defender was disadvantaged by being driven under the basket ... but the offensive player ended up on the ground, so I'm having trouble seeing exactly what advantage he gained from the contact.

All this being said, if you're going to have a whistle here then PC is the right call.

No way this is a blocking foul, the defender did nothing wrong here.

He managed to get a shot off that almost went in and then give his team a rebounding opportunity.