|
|||
Here are the plays. Talk away.
Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble." ----------------------------------------------------------- Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010) |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
It is only the connection between them all that would lead you to suspect they were deliberate.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association |
|
|||
Quote:
Somewhat similar to a post within the last week about a team that was down intentionally turning the ball over and giving up layups. Nothing in the rules specifically prevents it, but its not in the spirit of the game. I realize these two situations are vastly different, but my point is that one team is clearly doing something that is "not basketball." Probably a bigger issue than what could be fixed within a single game though. |
|
|||
Quote:
Absolutely. And this is why it would be tough to penalize with an F1, but is some sort of unsporting T justifiable? Last edited by frezer11; Fri Jan 26, 2018 at 04:35pm. |
|
|||
Dear God, NO! Where are you going to go next? T up the team the second time they foul on the ball at the end of the game because you know they really aren't doing anything other than trying to foul and its unsporting? You either have an FF1/intentional or you've got nothing.
|
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association |
|
|||
I stand by my answer of "as described" -- but I would not describe the video as the OP did.
|
|
|||
Okey dokey, not rocket science and not difficult to disguise. I'd say only 1 of the 4 should have been a regular foul. This is hack a shaq and we will hear more about it, because more teams will use it, particularly against this player, and actually you could do this with scrubs and affect 10 to 15 possessions a game. Other than the one where he is postin up, it is very obvious what is going on. You could teach a grade schooler to do that. I ask the guys currently in D1, if these aren't F1, does that mean a team disguising it in same manner could do it throughout the game? Fouler was a scrub, at what point as it repeats itself, if ever, do you call it f1? Because 15 times with 3 scrubs would be very easy and one third of possessions. Interested to hear thoughts as to where you'd draw the line, because we all know a grade schooler could be taught to be overzealous in such a manner. This wasn't Oscar worthy conduct. Based on repetition, but same conduct, when would you upgrade it to f1?
|
|
|||
seriously, the time to clarify this is before someone does it with 2 scrubs/10 fouls, or 3/15 fouls, rather than 1 scrub/5 fouls as OU did. Is it somehow clear somewhere how this is to be handled if done in the same manner? Any defender can hip, forearm, body any player on the floor in the same manner, and unless the player is standing in the corner you guys won't call it an F1? Where is the line? If no one on here can even speak to where the line is, that is worrisome, because it is more likely to be a controversy if not cleared up beforehand, rather than addressed after the fact.
|
|
|||
It's obvious you don't like the answers given. All who are not KU fans are providing unbiased feedback, and they all seem to be in agreement.
Maybe the KU player being fouled should spend more time practicing free throws. Becoming a better free throw shooter would be the best deterrent. |
|
|||
Quote:
I am a KU fan and a basketball fan in general, and am far more interested in the answer because I assume it is more clear than the answer given thus far. Square it with the Seton Hall game in the Dance last year https://www.sbnation.com/college-bas...desi-rodriguez No question what happened...Late in close game, in transition defender pushes dribbler from the side with a force that is called regular foul 99 times out of 100, BUT the players feet INADVERTENTLY get caught up with each other such that the dribbler goes flying. Officials change it to an F1 after review, wrongfully in my opinion, and Collins confirms to the media afterwards that it was the right call because it wasn't a legitimate attempt to player the player or ball, and said "“When a player puts two hands on the back and doesn’t make any attempt to play the ball or the player, get in front of him, it’s an F1 foul" My view is whether the conduct is 'legitimate' basketball. Bumping a cutter could be legitimate if the player is cutting towards the ball. But if a player is moving to set a ball screen and is getting forearmed and hipped off his stride, it is quite obvious that it is not basketball, it is conduct designed to get a foul call. Only 1 of those fouls in that video was arguably legit, and that was when the KU player was posting up and a wing player was looking to make an entry pass. The rest was crystal clear intentional and not legitimate. I ask for opinion as to clarification as to when a pattern of this conduct would rise to an F1, because as I said, a grade schooler could pull it off. OU did it with 5 fouls and a scrub player and got away with it, 4 of them in just a couple of minutes, how many fouls with players deep from the bench before you rise to F1? Do you warn? I don't know that it will continue with KU, as the player involved actually has very nice touch on his post game, particularly hooks, and I think he will improve. But it will be tested, and I don't think the rules are clear, at all. The word 'intentional' was taken out primarily to clarify that intent wasn't necessary for F1 in the initial craze of elbows to head. But I don't think it was meant to in any way back off the fact that conduct deemed intentional should be F1. Maybe I'm wrong, but the editorial language when the rule was changed simply referred to intent not being necessary. It's interesting, and I don't know that I've seen a team take advantage of the loophole to the extent that OU did last week. No one has even attempted to address the issue of if the identical conduct was repeated by players at the end of the bench, at what point do you warn or F1? That no one will even throw out an opinion is testament to the grey area the question presents. My view is that at least 2, if not 3, of those fouls should be considered F1. The quality of the acting job shouldn't be protection, the legitimacy of the conduct given play and circumstance should govern. Last edited by thedewed; Mon Jan 29, 2018 at 11:52am. |
|
|||
Quote:
Are you asking officials to evaluate where a player is on the team's depth chart, before judging an action on the floor? |
Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Fouling airborne shooter when ball is dead... ? | PSidbury | Basketball | 20 | Wed Dec 01, 2010 07:39pm |
Wake Forest vs VA Tech - Dead Ball Fouling | grunewar | Basketball | 11 | Wed Feb 17, 2010 02:09pm |
When the FT shooter has the ball ... | Johnny Ringo | Basketball | 7 | Wed Dec 27, 2006 11:29am |
FT - ball gets away from shooter | Rich | Basketball | 12 | Mon Feb 20, 2006 01:22am |
Fouling the Shooter | Flip | Basketball | 9 | Wed May 31, 2000 02:41am |