Hard foul, intentional, flagrant ? (HS)

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Rich

I know what the rules and case plays say -- I also know how this is typically called in practice. This discussion started with this video and someone saying that he'd consider a held ball.

All I was saying is that it's unlikely I'd even consider it if the player had the ball ripped loose or knocked out before he landed. Is this something that's based strictly in the rules or case plays? No, but it's something that I believe is true in practice. If a defender can rip it out before the offensive player lands, I'm likely rewarding that.

I have to say I only commented because I've never heard "can't call a held ball if it comes loose before feet hit floor." I'm obviously not in your area but I've never heard or learned that it's a practice not to call held ball if it comes loose before offense hits ground. I look at contact, how long it lasts and the effect on offensive player. I don't ever consider feet. Now, as a practical matter, if your talking about a player with a two inch vertical...if the ball is ripped loose before he lands then the contact and length of it isn't likely going to be enough to be a held ball. Likely just a blocked shot.

Also creating a loose ball isn't particularly a benefit to the defender....unless his team recovers it. Calling the held ball gives it to his team or makes other team use and lose the arrow to keep it.

Each has to make his or her own decision but I don't consider whether feet have landed. It's all about what happens up top for me and the length of it...

[hoopologist]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Everybody here agrees that unless there's something that is not shown in the video, this is NOT an intentional foul -- so what did the officials on the court decide?

For what it's worth, after a brief (2 minute) confab, the crew upgraded this to an IF. And, if I recall correctly, it was the Trail official who made the call. Perhaps he's assigned to do so or perhaps he took over the call. I do not know.

[bucky]

Originally Posted by Rich

"subsequent contact" - you cannot have a foul with contact only on the ball

I will have to remember that the next time an offensive player uses the ball to push away a defender.

(bad example I know and I get your point, just couldn't resist.)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bucky

... an offensive player uses the ball to push away a defender.

This has been an ongoing debate here on the Forum. I don't know if it's ever been fully resolved.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by hoopologist

Hard foul ... and more?

It's close. Excessive contact? Maybe? It's close.

4-19-3: An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that may or may
not be premeditated and is not based solely on the severity of the act. Intentional
fouls include, but are not limited to:
d. Excessive contact with an opponent while playing the ball.

NFHS Case 4.19.3 Sit B: A1 drives to the basket with B1 in pursuit. As A1 begins the act of shooting, B1 gets a hand on the ball from behind and the subsequent contact takes A1 forcefully to the floor and out of bounds."
"RULING: An intentional foul shall be charged when the contact is judged to be excessive, even though the opponent is playing the ball. (4-11)

Note: Here in my little corner of Connecticut, if this is deemed to be an excessive contact intentional foul, we're allowed to use this signal (below) after the intentional foul signal, which I don't believe is approved by either the NFHS, or IAABO.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It's close. Excessive contact? Maybe? It's close.

4-19-3: An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that may or may
not be premeditated and is not based solely on the severity of the act. Intentional
fouls include, but are not limited to:
d. Excessive contact with an opponent while playing the ball.

NFHS Case 4.19.3 Sit B: A1 drives to the basket with B1 in pursuit. As A1 begins the act of shooting, B1 gets a hand on the ball from behind and the subsequent contact takes A1 forcefully to the floor and out of bounds."
"RULING: An intentional foul shall be charged when the contact is judged to be excessive, even though the opponent is playing the ball. (4-11)

From this video it's no where near close Billy. At most he's trying to block a shot and catches wrist. Offense is in the air which is why he lands hard. Now if he hits wrist or all ball and follows through with body driving offense to floor you have something here.

If he pushes his legs sideways you have something here. Just not enough on this video.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BigCat

... follows through with body driving offense to floor you have something here. If he pushes his legs sideways you have something here.

I watched the video a second time. This is a really nasty looking foul until you break it down. The first time through the video, I didn't realize that the contact was mostly up top, on the wrist, with little or no body contact. So I can go along with just two shots.

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I watched the video a second time. This is a really nasty looking foul until you break it down. The first time through the video, I didn't realize that the contact was mostly up top, on the wrist, with little or no body contact. So I can go along with just two shots.

I think this may explain how the refs of the day got to intentional -- the hard landing made the contact look worse than it was. And they didn't see the play with a header that asks if it is hard foul, intentional, or flagrant. With that forewarning and looking for it, I thought it was pretty easy to say this was "just" a foul.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BigCat

I have to say I only commented because I've never heard "can't call a held ball if it comes loose before feet hit floor."

I think the NCAA and NFHS rules are different on this.

I don't have the time to research it.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I think the NCAA and NFHS rules are different on this.

I don't have the time to research it.

Well great. I guess I'll look it up. I thought about it tonight and in this kind of game, not much above rim play, no leapers...I can see where it does make some sense. Contact and length of it likely not long enough on the avg turnaround jumper if ball comes out before hitting ground.

I just focus up top more. Foreign to me to do it.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I think the NCAA and NFHS rules are different on this.

I don't have the time to research it.

Well, I'll be (how about u be instead) damned. The NCAAM rule does say prevent player from throwing or releasing on a try AND returning to floor with it etc.

I'll fine myself $20. Bucky, plz cover that for me.

[bucky]

Originally Posted by BigCat

I'll fine myself $20. Bucky, plz cover that for me.

Sigh.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by bucky

Sigh.

I'll pay you back....Tuesday.

Ps. WE are lucky I didn't bet longhorn on the college version of the rule...

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BigCat

Well, I'll be (how about u be instead) damned. The NCAAM rule does say prevent player from throwing or releasing on a try AND returning to floor with it etc.

I'll fine myself $20. Bucky, plz cover that for me.

Same in NCAAW. Make the fine $40.

[PAlbc]

If you look at the contact by the trail defender I think it's a reasonable shooting foul. The defender under the basket (#4) is a bit trickier because you can't see how the contact is made on the offensive player.

If the foul was called on #4, then I could see how they might upgrade to an IF. He makes the contact up high on the arm, then takes the contact all the way through to the ground. He still has #11w's right arm held almost until both of his own hands have hit the ground.

Again, this is only going by the angle of this video, but I would guess the officials decided that #4 had continued contact and force all the way through to the ground.

If the foul was called on the trail defender, then I have no idea how to call it an IF.