NBA Finals
 

Jeff Van Gundy said after an offensive foul call on LeBron that "a defender doesn't have to be set, that's a myth. As long as he's in a legal guarding position" I was impressed.

He is right, at least with regards to NFHS rules. Establish LGP and the offensive player has the obligation to go around you. I don't have the rulebook language handy and I don't know how different the NBA is on this from the level I work, but if there is contact and the offensive player initiates it before getting at least his head and shoulders beyond the defender, he is guilty of an offensive foul.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

I was not being facetious. I was impressed by Van Grundy because so many others will say that it's not a charge because the defender was moving.

I'm surprised that no one has posted that Curry's dribbling around LeBron was in fact an illegal dribble violation as at one point he touched the ball with both hands.

They don't have an illegal dribble violation rule in the NBA. :rolleyes:

I don't usually watch the NBA, but I watched the game for a while as I was on travel in a hotel. I just have no idea what a foul is and what constitutes an "illegal/moving screen/foul." It's just foreign to me.

I certainly admire their skill and athleticism, but, as an HS official, I find it difficult to interpret and compare to what I do.

I think the same thing. It's like they make up what's acceptable or not on the spot.

A NBA official told me last year its an entertainment league. So of course the rules are going to side on entertainment. Extra steps, jewelry, protecting stars, extra stuff on moving screens, playing while out of bounds or going out constantly, out of bounds plays, etc etc.

I will never look to improve my game or study the rules or comments here about the difference between the NBA and everything else. I do value the entertainment value of what I read about the NBA here but it stops there.

I watch very little of the NBA -- I'm bored by the game, to be honest.

One thing the NBA officials are VERY good at, the best in the world, is evaluating contact on shooters and players driving to the hoop. I watched some of Game 1 and they are SO good at officiating verticality and advantage/disadvantage. They always seem to be in a great spot to see contact on jump shooters.

Anyone who says they can't learn something from watching these guys is fooling himself.

"Jewelry" consists of wristbands, that's it. You don't see guys wearing chains or earrings, or watches. Which is why I don't care about wristbands in my summer games anymore. The injury risk is negligible.

As the dad of 2 up-and-coming D-League officials, I can say the dinner table discussions we used to have when we were all doing NFHS games was entertaining and I could contribute and keep up. Now, with NBA concepts as emphasis, its on a totally different plane and the level of complexity leaves me discombobulated.
NBA is truly a different mindset for officials.

If you were close enough to talk to an NBA official, you must have bought a ticket!!!

If I can properly break down your comment it would be in the following fashion:

"A NBA official told me last year its an entertainment league."

This may be valid quote but the comments following are strictly your own creation and were never uttered by an NBA official...

"So of course the rules are going to side on entertainment. Extra steps, jewelry, protecting stars, extra stuff on moving screens, playing while out of bounds or going out constantly, out of bounds plays, etc etc."

As to the 2nd paragraph of your comment I would submit it says more about your initiative and motivation to improve, or lack thereof.

Drop on by, got a couple of guys you used to work with who can get you up to speed with NBA philosophies:)

Nice!
 

Y'all watch the games together and get the play-by-play?

When you do not understand the game you are officiating, this is a problem for those that continue to make that argument. Not enough of use are students of the game we claim we like so much.

Peace

Almost never watch games for mindless entertainment. Plus, live TV doesn't have on demand instant replay.

They'll follow up on the NBA ref resource video of the game which includes a choice of many varied camera angles if there are plays worth reviewing. These camera angles aren't part of the TV broadcast feed.

That is the problem right there. The NBA game is vastly different from what we see at the NCAA and NFHS levels. The rules are also different. In fact, they differ so much that attempting to apply what the NBA does would be erroneous at the levels which I work.
The philosophy is not in accordance. See my previous comments on this forum to Ben Taylor.

The NBA is more in line with other levels than the other major sports. That is for damn sure.

I never get it when people keep trying to act like the NBA is so different in rules or philosophy when it is simply not true.

Peace

Well, except for traveling, continuation, legality of zone defense, the shot clock, bonus free throws, jump balls after the initial jump, and the numbers players can wear, you're right. It is pretty much the same game.

A foul is a foul. Legal Guarding Position is the same at all levels, the regular flow of play is essentially the same as far as how to officiate it. I think watching the NBA officials is highly useful for gaining insights on officiating, generally. They are the very best.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

NFHS v NBA differences
(A quick list after only a couple minutes of thought)
Backcourt count- length and reset
Shot clock
Closely-guarded
BI & GT -- backboard
Block/charge--upward movement & RA
Screens
Zone defense
FT lane width
Court length
3pt line distance & shape
How Ts count or don't as individual fouls
5 fouls v 6 fouls
32 minutes v 48 minutes
Trash talking v sporting behavior emphasis
Showboating and hanging on the ring
Jumpball restarts
Backcourt access on throw-ins
Traveling rules

Zone defense is no longer an NBA rule. The present rule is defensive 3 seconds although you could argue that it tries to do the same thing the zone defense rule did.

Also: NBA pays it's players a little more than NFHS - although not much more than NCAA. :D

So much for the "conspiracy theorists" that had the Refs helping the Cavaliers with game five so it would go to a game six ($$). Yawn..... :rolleyes:

Continuation? What's different?

What do those rules have to do with how the game basically looks? If you call a foul for example, the result is basically the same. A team called for a violation loses the ball. If a team is called for a you either get shots or you get the ball out of bounds. It is not like football where a foul might not even be enforced from the same spot or you get an automatic first down during certain actions in the NFL and never come close to that in a high school game. We as football can watch an NFL game and not have a single application of a foul the same, but not one goes around and says, "You cannot watch the NFL and understand what is going on." But for some reason we act like the NBA is a different animal. Well I can tell you the NFL has about 300 rules differences to the NF or high school rules. College football has about 200 or so more differences from the NFL and no one says you cannot learn how to call a holding foul from the NFL. As a matter of fact many of the philosophies on what is a foul often comes from the NFL as they have video and training that has trickled down.

If the claim is that the philosophies are different, of course they are on some level. You have adults compared to children playing. That is the case at any professional level compared to high school aged kids. The way a manager in baseball comes out to argue a safe/out call is totally different than what is allowed from the MLB to NF or even youth baseball. You cannot restrict that manager to the dugout in the pros. I am sure and know that language is allowed with adults that would never be allowed with kids. Again everyone is getting paid well so I would expect there to be some differences. The bottom line is when I see a foul in the NBA if I am a student of the game I know why that fouls or violation is called and not totally confused. If I am confused that confused, I never watched a basketball game. Many of us became officials because of what we liked or witnessed at the pro or college level. We often learn that those rules are vastly different in certain areas, but the general job we are doing is exactly the same.

Peace

In NFHS, if a foul occurs prior to the act of shooting, any following movement that sends the ball through the basket is not a goal, as it occurred during a dead ball. Period, full stop.

In the NBA, players are given a "lag" time to continue their initial motion, so as to get a three point play

From Bill James's 2015 article "Discontinue Continuation"

No such rule exists in NFHS.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

+1 well said. I officiate baseball in Massachusetts where we use OBR, or pro rules. The substitution rules make a huge difference in the game. There are also differences in the slide rule. Those two rule differences change how the game is played from NFHS. Plus, we use 2 man mechanics in most NFHS games, which is a HUGE difference versus the 4 man game at the MLB level.

Basketball is, by and large, a simple game. There are just not that many rules, so there aren't that many rules differences. The only sport that translates from the top level to the bottom with fewer rule differences, in my opinion, is soccer.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

I am going to have to disagree with you adamantly on this one. Because the rule in the NF basically says that once you start the motion you are allowed to continue that motion to the basket. That means as long as you do not dribble, or make a move not associated with any other action, the basket should could. The NBA just teaches it better and the "lag time" you reference is not anything different in the NF rule. That is why people have gone to saying "The gather" is the starting point of a shot. But if you put the ball down again after being fouled in an NBA game, the time to be awarded shots on a foul is over. That happened a couple of times in the NBA Finals alone and the issue was if they should give shots or not after the foul. Players at that level do what they can to get the advantage where high school players feel they need to complete their predetermined move. And high school officials have convinced themselves the rule is different and do everything to not awarded a shot. That is why there is the long standing myth used, "on the floor." It is clear that many high school officials do not realize that the shooting motion has little to do with if you are on the floor or not.

Peace

They maybe we should all use an abacus? :confused:

I disagree with your blanket assessment of HS referees. Here in my IAABO chapter in Connecticut, we are taught from the beginning that the act of shooting begins as soon as the shooter ends his dribble. We can call it a shooting foul if the player could have conceivably been in the act of shooting at the time of the foul. This can and does mean that a shooting foul can arise from a player who is fouled as he picks up the dribble, regardless of whether the shooter proceeds to take a legal step, jump, or otherwise rise up and shoot, or even if the player is unable to complete any of these acts due to the foul. What I see in the NBA is players getting two or even three steps following the foul and still being given "continuation". It is a different interpretation. Im sure a quick youtube search would reveal a lot of examples of "and ones" in the NBA that would not be three point plays in NFHS.

But there is no reason to quibble on this. The continuation interpretation has a very small impact on the game and your original point still holds.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

You are misapplying the NBA's travel rule to continuation. NBA allows 2 steps before travel and if the officials "allow" 3, it's more that they missed a travel and awarded a legal basket. The difference is what is allowed as a basketball move when it comes to continuation and what isn't.

Can you clarify, then, what is meant by a basketball move? I admit that my interpretation of continuation could use some more education on the topic. Also, I was avoiding the traveling difference. Lifting and replanting the pivot foot in NFHS is traveling. I have no idea what constitutes a travel in the NBA. What I do know, is when I used the word "continuation" in a middle school game to explain why I awarded free throws, I got a rebuke that this term doesn't exist in the fed rule book. This is correct. I still made the correct decision, in my view, but I will always say "in the act of shooting" from now on.

It is indeed a minor difference

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

I find this tough to explain but if you think the player is making an attempt to score at the time they get fouled then they are allowed to "continue" that motion.

Say a player is going for a layup and gathers the ball and then steps. He then gets fouled. Do you allow him to finish his attempt to the basket? What if he stops and pirouettes on his pivot foot and then after a second or two puts up the shot?

Although one can argue that in both cases he is in the act of shooting, the reality is that only one of those will be called such, and is expect to be called as such and the other isn't.

Keep in mind high school officials also work other levels. So there are officials that have either been to other level training or have taken the time through video study or watching others to get better in this area. But again, high school officials are from the brand new official to the 40 year veteran.

Couple things that need to be stated. The NBA has a different rule for traveling which would allow a different allowances for when a pivot foot is established. That would make a difference. Secondly the rule still is basically the same as when you are fouled you are allowed to continue your normal motion. So if you have not traveled or not stopped what you were legally able to do (unless you dribble again) then that motion can continue. Where is the rule different? During the Finals Curry had a play where he was fouled and put up a shot and was given the shot. The only thing at issue was if he dribbled again which he did not and he was awarded the shots.

Nothing really to quibble over or have a major debate about, I just think it is clear to me that many think the rule is so different when it is not. Even your description does not take into account how a player in the NBA establishes their pivot foot. And the reality is that high school officials often do not award any shots if the shooter is not off the floor to elevated to shoot at the time of contact.

Peace

As a watcher of game , I think this is ultimately the issue: in my experience, HS referees (especially sub-varsity) are far less likely to judge that the shooting motion had started than NBA referees (or NCAA) - and are far less consistent on where the lines are.

No More "On The Floor" Please ...
 

Here in my little corner of Connecticut, and in Connecticut overall, this continues to be a major problem. To many high school officials "on the floor" indicates that the shooting hasn't started. We've got many girls, and a few boys, that shoot an old fashioned set shot from behind the three point line, with both feet "on the floor".

When training new officials I tell them 3 phrases that are to be eliminated from their vocabulary....."on the floor", "over the back" and "reaching in" and give them the correct reasoning and rules references for situations where these trite phrases may be invoked
.
Too bad these unsavory terms persist with some supposedly experienced officials.

You Don't Say ...
 

And the biggest one ,,,,,

$90 game fee vs $X00,000 salary.