The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 23, 2017, 04:03pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 60
Swinging arms question again :

I apologize if this has been beaten to death but the other night my two partners asked the question again .............. what is the penalty for elbow contact above the shoulder. I searched the forum and found the below information................... is this the most current interpretation ?

Thanks



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.
b. 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.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 23, 2017, 04:08pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,471
I would check your local listings on this one. It is the last NF interpretation that I remember. But they have not addressed this on that extensively in a few years.

Intentional Fouls are very subjective to what is and when it is not. I would check with your local interpreters because they might have a different take.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 23, 2017, 07:17pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,952
Posted By A Forum Member A Few Years Ago ...

Not sure how accurate this is, but it's worth starting a discussion.

__________________
"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; Mon Oct 23, 2017 at 07:21pm.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 23, 2017, 08:12pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Seaford, Virginia
Posts: 132
I like the chart and diagram, but I don't see any specific language in the NFHS rules or case book to back that up, as far as what area of contact results in a flagrant foul, intentional foul, etc.
Most of the discussions I have heard about contact to the head and the resulting penalties, concerned the college rule set, which I do not claim to know all the details.

Last edited by DrPete; Mon Oct 23, 2017 at 08:15pm.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 23, 2017, 09:35pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Refk View Post
I apologize if this has been beaten to death but the other night my two partners asked the question again .............. what is the penalty for elbow contact above the shoulder. I searched the forum and found the below information................... is this the most current interpretation ?

Thanks



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.
b. 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.
This is the language from 2012 points of emphasis. Travesty that it never made it into the rule book. A stationary elbow can be nothing or personal foul. Example, screen set with elbows outside the frame. Defender runs into that elbow. Personal foul. Elbow wasn't moving.
Elbow in movement but not excessive (above shoulders) is intentional foul. A normal pivot makes elbow move. Contact by these words means intentional. If it is excessive movement then flagrant. Players are responsible for their own elbows.

Now that's what this POE language means. It's not in the rules so you get many individual interpretations. Do check with your interpreters as mentioned above.

Last edited by BigCat; Mon Oct 23, 2017 at 09:41pm.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 23, 2017, 10:07pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Seaford, Virginia
Posts: 132
It does seem like the NHFS definitely wants a violation called every time when there is excessive elbow swinging with no contact by the following language in Rule 4.

4.24.8

It is not legal to swing arms and elbows excessively. This occurs when:

a. 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.

b. The aggressiveness with which the arms and elbows are swung could cause injury to another player if contacted.

Using this description as a basis, an official will promptly and unhesitatingly rule such action with arms and elbows a violation.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 23, 2017, 10:19pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,952
How Will Young Officials Know ???

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCat View Post
... 2012 points of emphasis. Travesty that it never made it into the rule book ... It's not in the rules.
Travesty. Agree 100%. Stupid NFHS rules editor.
__________________
"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; Mon Oct 23, 2017 at 10:21pm.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 23, 2017, 10:24pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Seaford, Virginia
Posts: 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
Travesty. Agree 100%. Stupid NFHS rules editor.
There are a dozen or more contributors on this site that could do a much better job of writing and editing the rule book than the NFHS committee.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 23, 2017, 10:24pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,952
Point of Emphasis ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrPete View Post
I like the chart and diagram, but I don't see any specific language in the NFHS rules or case book to back that up,
True, because it was just a Point of Emphasis, and only for one year.

Are such rulings supposed to be passed down to new officials by discussions around a campfire, like the oral traditions of prehistoric people?

Hey NFHS rules editor. We have something new for you. It's called written language, and we even have printing presses.

Stupid NFHS rules editor.
__________________
"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; Mon Oct 23, 2017 at 10:29pm.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 23, 2017, 10:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,804
Thankfully it doesn't happen that often. Explaining/ Backing up a call by saying it appeared in a Poe 5 years ago...not good.😞
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2017, 03:49am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCat View Post
This is the language from 2012 points of emphasis. Travesty that it never made it into the rule book. A stationary elbow can be nothing or personal foul. Example, screen set with elbows outside the frame. Defender runs into that elbow. Personal foul. Elbow wasn't moving.
Elbow in movement but not excessive (above shoulders) is intentional foul. A normal pivot makes elbow move. Contact by these words means intentional. If it is excessive movement then flagrant. Players are responsible for their own elbows.

Now that's what this POE language means. It's not in the rules so you get many individual interpretations. Do check with your interpreters as mentioned above.
I'm glad it didn't...and the NCAA also backed away from this strict application too. For a while, the NCAA was going with an F1 on just about any elbow contact above the shoulders. They wisely dumped that interpretation after a year or so after players rebounding a ball were getting tagged with F1's because the elbow made contact with a head while "moving". They went with a much more sensible interpretation and application after that allowing for normal basketball plays to be incidental or just common, even if a moving elbow made contact with the head.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2017, 05:26am
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,952
Law Of The Land ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
... the NCAA also backed away from this strict application ... They wisely dumped that interpretation after a year or so ...
Did the NCAA actually come out with a new rule, casebook play, or Point of Emphasis that counteracted the "original" interpretation? Because the NFHS is just leaving us blowing in the wind.

If a NFHS Point of Emphasis falls in the forest and nobody hears it, does it still exist?

As far as I know, the NFHS "Swinging Elbows Above The Shoulder Point Of Emphasis" is still the law of the land.

Stupid NFHS rules editor.
__________________
"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)
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2017, 07:38am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
I'm glad it didn't...and the NCAA also backed away from this strict application too. For a while, the NCAA was going with an F1 on just about any elbow contact above the shoulders. They wisely dumped that interpretation after a year or so after players rebounding a ball were getting tagged with F1's because the elbow made contact with a head while "moving". They went with a much more sensible interpretation and application after that allowing for normal basketball plays to be incidental or just common, even if a moving elbow made contact with the head.
I agree any contact with moving elbow = intentional is harsh. I prefer the ncaam rule. It is in that rule book. The travesty is that nothing is in the nfhs rules and it hasnt been discussed since 2012. Except here.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2017, 08:39am
Lighten up, Francis.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,605
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
Did the NCAA actually come out with a new rule, casebook play, or Point of Emphasis that counteracted the "original" interpretation?
Yes, they did. They introduced the concept of a player's "cylinder", within which a player with the ball is allowed to make any "basketball move". If there is contact with a defender within that cylinder during a normal basketball move, the defender is responsible for the contact.

This is obviously a direct contradiction of the previous rules on F1 fouls for moving elbows.

Somebody else will have to post the NCAA citation, as I don't have my new books yet.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 24, 2017, 09:33am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,966
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrapper1 View Post
Yes, they did. They introduced the concept of a player's "cylinder", within which a player with the ball is allowed to make any "basketball move". If there is contact with a defender within that cylinder during a normal basketball move, the defender is responsible for the contact.

This is obviously a direct contradiction of the previous rules on F1 fouls for moving elbows.

Somebody else will have to post the NCAA citation, as I don't have my new books yet.
Rule 4-39.1.c: “The space that a player may legally occupy is defined by an imaginary cylinder surrounding the player and which extends from the floor to as far above the player as he can jump or extend his arms and body. The diameter of the cylinder shall not extend beyond the hands/arms on the front (the arms bent at the elbow), the buttocks on the back and the legs on the sides. These dimensions may vary according to the height and size of the player.”

4-39.1.k: “The offensive player must be allowed enough space to make a normal basketball play. The defense may not invade the vertical space of the offense and make illegal contact when the offensive player is attempting a normal basketball play. A normal basketball play in this context includes shooting, passing, dribbling or pivoting.”
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

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
excessively swinging arms/elbows w/ out contact j51969 Basketball 10 Thu Dec 07, 2006 11:23pm
Question - Swinging Elbows - Tech or Violation bradfordwilkins Basketball 5 Sun Feb 20, 2005 09:25pm
Excessively swinging of arms/elbows jritchie Basketball 2 Tue Oct 26, 2004 07:17am
Excessively swinging of arms or elbows, violation question? jritchie Basketball 14 Tue Oct 12, 2004 09:31am
Excessively Swinging Arms or Elbows Fox40 Basketball 10 Fri Oct 22, 1999 01:44pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:49am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1