NCAAW Louisville/Miss St

[walt]

I agree with Bob Jenkins. It will be interesting to see if this makes our video next year. To me the defender is running straight down her path and never comes into the offensive player. In fact the overhead angle has her, IMHO, moving to her right a step. They come together at a spot on the floor. I have the offensive player moving into a vertical defensive player who has maintained her path. I was ok with the no call live and ok with it here on film. I am not sure the defender did anything wrong except be bigger than the offensive player which caused the offensive player to bounce off of her when they came together. Again just my opinion. If it does make the video, it will be interesting to see what the powers that be think about it. Both the C from a good angle slightly behind and the L have a good look at the action of both players.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by walt

I agree with Bob Jenkins. It will be interesting to see if this makes our video next year. To me the defender is running straight down her path and never comes into the offensive player. In fact the overhead angle has her, IMHO, moving to her right a step. They come together at a spot on the floor. I have the offensive player moving into a vertical defensive player who has maintained her path.

All good, except that isn't within the rights of a defender. Did she have LGP? No. Not even close. As such, she has no right to be moving at the time of contact. Even if she did have LGP, the movement, even if it was in an established path was such that the offensive player had head and shoulders past the defender. She also move towards the shooter in making contact.

It may be that the powers that be are OK with not making the call, but it will not be because it wasn't a foul (by rule).

[walt]

To me this is two players who get to the same spot at the same time. It is not a block charge play. To me they come together legally at the same spot from two different positions and angles. If both get to that spot legally, there can be a collision with no foul. I do not have the defender moving into the offensive player. I have her moving perpendicularly towards the endline. The offensive player is headed to the basket. I understand you have the defender doing something wrong where I have two players in equal positions getting to the same spot at the same time from different positions and that is why I am ok with the no call. Both C and T were looking right at it and trail, while farther away, had an open look as well. Like I said, if it is part of the video, or if it makes the rounds at camps this summer, it will be interesting to see how the big dogs and coordinators see it.

Originally Posted by walt

To me this is two players who get to the same spot at the same time. It is not a block charge play. To me they come together legally at the same spot from two different positions and angles. If both get to that spot legally, there can be a collision with no foul. I do not have the defender moving into the offensive player. I have her moving perpendicularly towards the endline. The offensive player is headed to the basket. I understand you have the defender doing something wrong where I have two players in equal positions getting to the same spot at the same time from different positions and that is why I am ok with the no call. Both C and T were looking right at it and trail, while farther away, had an open look as well. Like I said, if it is part of the video, or if it makes the rounds at camps this summer, it will be interesting to see how the big dogs and coordinators see it.

A player having a right to a spot on the floor is more for stationary players. A player doesn’t have to have LGP to occupy a spot, but when defenders are moving then LGP is used to determine wether contact is legal or not.

[MechanicGuy]

There are some interesting contortions happening in here in order to justify a non-call.

Even acknowledging that calls are different in the final seconds, I can't see this as anything but a foul.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by walt

To me this is two players who get to the same spot at the same time. It is not a block charge play. To me they come together legally at the same spot from two different positions and angles. If both get to that spot legally, there can be a collision with no foul. I do not have the defender moving into the offensive player. I have her moving perpendicularly towards the endline. The offensive player is headed to the basket. I understand you have the defender doing something wrong where I have two players in equal positions getting to the same spot at the same time from different positions and that is why I am ok with the no call. Both C and T were looking right at it and trail, while farther away, had an open look as well. Like I said, if it is part of the video, or if it makes the rounds at camps this summer, it will be interesting to see how the big dogs and coordinators see it.

So, you'll let a defender collide with a shooter because they came from "equal" positions? If so, and I apologize if this sounds too critical, your whole understanding of the rule is just fundamentally flawed. They are not in equal positions....one has the ball and that changes everything, guarding rules apply and there is nothing in guarding about equal positions. The equal positions concept has to do with players getting to a ball.

[BigT]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

So, you'll let a defender collide with a shooter because they came from "equal" positions? If so, and I apologize if this sounds too critical, your whole understanding of the rule is just fundamentally flawed. They are not in equal positions....one has the ball and that changes everything, guarding rules apply and there is nothing in guarding about equal positions. The equal positions concept has to do with players getting to a ball.

Camron lets jump the fence. Why did these officials pass on an obvious shooting foul?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BigT

Camron lets jump the fence. Why did these officials pass on an obvious shooting foul?

Going to OT.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

All good, except that isn't within the rights of a defender. Did she have LGP? No. Not even close. As such, she has no right to be moving at the time of contact. Even if she did have LGP, the movement, even if it was in an established path was such that the offensive player had head and shoulders past the defender. She also move towards the shooter in making contact.

It may be that the powers that be are OK with not making the call, but it will not be because it wasn't a foul (by rule).

So if a defensive player (B1) is running up the court the ball-handler can just run up beside B1, create illegal contact, then get the benefit of a foul?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Raymond

So if a defensive player (B1) is running up the court the ball-handler can just run up beside A1, create illegal contact, then get the benefit of a foul?

Not if I am on the play.

Peace

[jeremy341a]

I am calling that a foul every time. Offensively player has the angle. Defense who is not legal moves into her during the shot.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Raymond

So if a defensive player (B1) is running up the court the ball-handler can just run up beside B1, create illegal contact, then get the benefit of a foul?

Not what happened here. But somewhat, yes. The ball handler pretty much has the right to go where he/she likes. It is the defender's job to legally get in the path to stop them. If they can't get into the path, then they don't have a legal position. I may not grant a foul call of they are side-by-side and the dribbler cuts sideways to create contact but, in this play, the defender ran into the back of the dribbler/shooter as the dribble cut across the front of the defender's path. The shooter beat her to the spot and was fouled.

[walt]

They are side by side through this entire play. Slow it down frame by frame. At the :24 second mark of the clip, the offensive player is actually behind the left leg of the defender and they are side to side. Both officials (C & L) have an angle on the play with a shooter on the ground and have no call. I happen to agree with them. The offense initiated the contact on a defender who beat her to a spot. I am not disagreeing time and score may have impacted the decision but like Rut and Raymond have said, I just don't see a foul here.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by walt

They are side by side through this entire play. Slow it down frame by frame. At the :24 second mark of the clip, the offensive player is actually behind the left leg of the defender and they are side to side. Both officials (C & L) have an angle on the play with a shooter on the ground and have no call. I happen to agree with them. The offense initiated the contact on a defender who beat her to a spot. I am not disagreeing time and score may have impacted the decision but like Rut and Raymond have said, I just don't see a foul here.

Sorry, your description of the play just does not match what is in the video. The defender wasn't even close to beating anyone to the spot. She was running full speed and got passed then ran into the shooter. Even if they got to the spot at the same time or even if the defender got there first, she simply did not do so legally. Who initiates contact is not a factor in the rules. The defender has to obtain their spot legally. The only thing that kept that from being a foul was the time and score.

[ByRule]

The contact occurred on the back side of her right shoulder. Side by side isn’t legal. Legal needs to be facing the torso and both feet on the floor. B tries to jump to block the shot and she is not jumping from A and landing on A. Player A’s contact did not cause B be to land on spot B.
I don’t see OIC on this play. I see offense getting the angle to attack the rim and B cutting the angle off late.
I didn’t see the game possibly they were matching a call that happened late in the game that was similar.