The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 30, 2018, 06:03pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 18,822
Old Casebook Plays Never Die, They Just Fade Away …

With apologies to General Douglas MacArthur.

4-23-1: Every player is entitled to a spot on the playing court provided such player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent.

10.6.1 SITUATION E: B1 attempts to steal the ball from stationary A1 who is holding the ball. B1 misses the ball and falls to the floor. In dribbling away, A1 contacts B1's leg, loses control of the ball and falls to the floor. RULING: No infraction or foul has occurred and play continues. Unless B1 made an effort to trip or block A1, he/she is entitled to a position on the court even if it is momentarily lying on the floor after falling down.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrPete View Post
What year was this casebook play published?
Last appeared in the 2004-05 NFHS casebook. And then, Penn and Teller made it disappear.

Is a fourteen year old casebook play still relevant? Does the interpretation still stand if the NFHS hasn't published it (nor have they published a retraction) for fourteen years? Inquiring minds want to know.

How are young officials without old archived casebooks supposed know this interpretation? By the oral tradition of young basketball officials sitting around a campfire listening to stories about old casebook plays from old, grizzled, veteran officials (like Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.)?
__________________
"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; Thu Aug 30, 2018 at 06:13pm.
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old Fri Aug 31, 2018, 12:38am
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 29,220
I do not give a darn about old interpretations. They cannot put it somewhere, it does not matter to me personally. I really do not see the obsession over them anyway.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old Fri Aug 31, 2018, 09:44am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 152
the defensive player although obtaining LGP is changing their position on an airborne shooter after they have left the floor without contact .. the offensive player has a right to land without contact so landing on the defense makes it a block I think
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old Fri Aug 31, 2018, 11:00am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,962
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valley Man View Post
the defensive player although obtaining LGP is changing their position on an airborne shooter after they have left the floor without contact .. the offensive player has a right to land without contact so landing on the defense makes it a block I think
Where you you get the idea that the defensive player can not change position?
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old Fri Aug 31, 2018, 11:02am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NB/PEI, Canada
Posts: 776
Super late to the party and this is pet peeve of mine but here is my stance in a nutshell.

1) If the defender has LGP then can move sideways or backward and maintain LGP. The way in which they move sideways or backwards is up to them so if they choose to fall backwards ok.

2) We all know they all allowed to duck or turn/twist to protect themselves but I would bet my next pay check that 90% of the time in High school and lower level games when a kid twists, turns or ducks in response to the imminent contact its getting called a block.

3) In the world of concussions kids/parents/coaches are not soft for wanting controlled falls. If its not a charge thats fine but you can't (IMO) call a block or a tech because a kid doesn't want to get hit or hit hard. If it becomes a no call you can have your reasons.

4) Only way this should be a foul of any kind is if kid is falling or throwing themselves at the ground without any contact or chance of contact severe enough to displace them AND acting like they've been trucked AND being indignant about the lack of call - this can be a tech. OR if the offensive player changes their path and the defender falls anyway into a path they didn't have LGP for you can call the block ie. Defender A sets their LGP in the path B1 sidesteps and defender falls with no contact anyway but falls across the landing area or new path where they didn't have LGP.
__________________
Coach: Hey ref I'll make sure you can get out of here right after the game!

Me: Thanks, but why the big rush.

Coach: Oh I thought you must have a big date . . .we're not the only ones your planning on F$%&ing tonite are we!
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old Fri Aug 31, 2018, 01:33pm
This IS My Social Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at L, T, or C
Posts: 2,376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valley Man View Post
"...the offensive player has a right to land without contact..."
I am intrigued by this opinion and would be interested in the rules basis for it.
__________________
Making Every Effort to Be in the Right Place at the Right Time, Looking at the Right Thing to Make the Right Call
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old Fri Aug 31, 2018, 03:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,962
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freddy View Post
I am intrigued by this opinion and would be interested in the rules basis for it.
I would agree that the offensive player has the right to land without contact IF the defender was not already in the path before the offensive player jumped. That is a fundamental part of LGP. Perhaps that is what he meant.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old Fri Aug 31, 2018, 04:39pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 18,822
Statute Of Limitations ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge View Post
I do not give a darn about old interpretations. They cannot put it somewhere, it does not matter to me personally. I really do not see the obsession over them anyway.
I can certainly understand JRutledge's point, especially in regard to how a new official gets exposure to an interpretation that isn't presently published somewhere, anywhere, in any current official NFHS document.

However, the NFHS does this to us all the time.

Annual NFHS interpretations are publicized for a single year and then disappear from subsequent official NFHS documents (good example: 2009-10 SITUATION 11, An Obvious Timing Mistake Corrected). Happens every year. Does this mean that single year NFHS annual interpretations (assuming there are no subsequent relevant NFHS rule changes, no subsequent relevant NFHS retractions, or no subsequent relevant revised NFHS annual interpretations) subsequently become null and void?

Annual NFHS Points of Emphasis (good example: 2012-13, Contact Above The Shoulders) may be publicized for a single year (sometimes they reappear) and then often disappear from subsequent official NFHS documents. Happens all the time. Does this mean that single year NFHS Points of Emphasis (assuming there are no subsequent relevant NFHS rule changes, no subsequent relevant NFHS retractions, or no subsequent relevant revised NFHS interpretations) subsequently become null and void?

NFHS Casebook Plays sometimes disappear, unannounced, unpublicized, for no apparent reason other than to possibly save space, at which point they then disappear from subsequent official NFHS documents (good example: 2004-05 NFHS Casebook, 10.6.1 SITUATION E, Player On Floor). Does this mean that a NFHS Casebook Play that disappears, unannounced, unpublicized, for no apparent reason (assuming there are no subsequent relevant NFHS rule changes, no subsequent relevant NFHS retractions, or no subsequent relevant revised NFHS Casebook Plays) subsequently become null and void?

Yes, I know that it's very difficult, possibly impossible, for a new official to get exposure to an old annual interpretation, old Point of Emphasis, or old casebook play, that isn't presently published somewhere, anywhere, in any current official NFHS document, but I don't believe that it's appropriate for those of us who are veterans, who have been to many rodeos, who have been around the block many times, who know these old interpretations, to pretend that they never existed, to ignore them, and to rule contrary to them (assuming there are no subsequent relevant NFHS rule changes, subsequent NFHS retractions, or subsequent revised NFHS interpretations).

The stupid NFHS does this to us all the time.
__________________
"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; Sat Sep 01, 2018 at 10:36am.
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old Fri Aug 31, 2018, 07:22pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
I would agree that the offensive player has the right to land without contact IF the defender was not already in the path before the offensive player jumped. That is a fundamental part of LGP. Perhaps that is what he meant.
Kinda what I meant .. if a defender obtains LGP and then falls back prematurely wont they more than likely move their feet somewhat backwards as well? thus moving positions AFTER the offense left the floor

with new POE on verticality does that play into this play as well .. player losing verticality

I am having issues with this play as well. I want to be able to chirp it to a coach as to the reason play was called and it is not simple.
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old Sat Sep 01, 2018, 12:34am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,962
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valley Man View Post
Kinda what I meant .. if a defender obtains LGP and then falls back prematurely wont they more than likely move their feet somewhat backwards as well? thus moving positions AFTER the offense left the floor

with new POE on verticality does that play into this play as well .. player losing verticality

I am having issues with this play as well. I want to be able to chirp it to a coach as to the reason play was called and it is not simple.
You seem to be stuck on the concept of the defender moving. Forget that. It is leading you to the wrong conclusion. Nothing in the rules says the defender can't move at all after the offense left the floor. Judging by that criteria will lead you to penalize a legal defender.

It does, however, say the defender must have LGP (in the path, two feet down, facing) before the offense jumps. It also says that the defender may move laterally or obliquely away after obtaining LGP. So, if a defender has to move sideways after the offense jumps in order to be in a position to take contact, that means they were NOT in the path and, by definition, didn't have LGP when the shooter jumped. Call it a block.

However, if a defender has LGP at the time of the jump and is in a position such that the offense is already going to hit them and they move laterally (slightly, position adjusting, but not into the path) or backwards and the offense still hits them, they have met the requirements of getting a legal position. Nothing they have done is wrong and can't commit a block. Note that having LGP also does not require the defender to continue to have two feet down or continue to face the opponent. They may be stepping, jumping, turning, etc. all while having LGP previously obtained.


As for verticality, that is about extending part of your body outside of your plane into the space of an opponent or jumping towards your opponent, not extending something away from your opponent. It is violating the vertical plane marked by the front of your established position.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com

Last edited by Camron Rust; Sat Sep 01, 2018 at 04:43pm.
Reply With Quote
  #41 (permalink)  
Old Sat Sep 01, 2018, 07:19am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 152
thanks!

so your call is ...

coach inquires your quick answer is ...
Reply With Quote
  #42 (permalink)  
Old Sat Sep 01, 2018, 07:35am
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 18,822
Let's Go To The Videotape ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Valley Man View Post
... new POE on verticality does that play into this play as well ...
Basketball Points of Emphasis - 2018-19

LEGAL GUARDING POSITION, BLOCK/CHARGE, SCREENING, VERTICALITY

For 2018-19, the NFHS Basketball Rules Committee feels it imperative to remind coaches, officials and players about the restrictions in specific contact situations. Fundamental to each of these is the establishment of a legal guarding position with these reminders: Rule 4-23 defines guarding position.
•Once established, the defense can adjust to absorb contact or react to play while maintaining that position.
•Once established and maintained legally, block/charge must be ruled when occurring.
•Many times, a no call is not appropriate as a determination must be made.
•A defender does NOT have to remain stationary for a player control foul to occur. After obtaining a legal position, a defender may move laterally, even, diagonally to maintain position but may NOT move toward an opponent.
•Blocking is illegal personal contact with impedes the progress of an opponent with or without the ball.
•Charging is illegal personal contact caused by pushing or moving into an opponent’s torso.
•There must be reasonable space between two defensive players or a defensive player and a boundary line to allow the dribbler to continue in her path.
•If there is less than 3 feet of space, the dribbler has the greater responsibility for the conduct.
•A player with the ball is to expect no leniency regarding space.
•A player without the ball is to be given distance to find and avoid the defender (two strides by rule).
•A player must be in-bounds to have a legal guarding position.
•If an opponent is airborne (whether or not he/she has the ball), legal guarding position must be obtained before the opponent left the floor.

Diligence and constant review of game video and the rules code will help officials be consistent in the application of these rules.
__________________
"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
  #43 (permalink)  
Old Sat Sep 01, 2018, 07:41am
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 18,822
Short And Sweet ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Valley Man View Post
... coach inquires your quick answer is ...
"Coach. The defender was in initial legal guarding position and didn't move toward the offensive player. The defender is entitled to a position on the court even if the defender is momentarily lying on the floor after falling down. The defender made no attempt to trip the offensive player. A player accidentally tripping is not the same as player being intentionally tripped. Also, I did not believe that the defender faked being fouled."

"And, yes Coach, I agree with you, I do look like George Clooney's identical twin."

Of course, if I'm short on patience, I could just simply give him the famous quote by that ancient, basketball official, Confucius, "There's a difference between being tripped, and tripping".
__________________
"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; Sat Sep 01, 2018 at 02:22pm.
Reply With Quote
  #44 (permalink)  
Old Sat Sep 01, 2018, 03:37pm
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
"Coach. The defender was in initial legal guarding position and didn't move toward the offensive player. The defender is entitled to a position on the court even if the defender is momentarily lying on the floor after falling down. The defender made no attempt to trip the offensive player. A player accidentally tripping is not the same as player being intentionally tripped. Also, I did not believe that the defender faked being fouled."

If the defender is moving away from the offensive player and there is contact, he has not committed a foul whether he had previously had legal guarding position or not.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote
  #45 (permalink)  
Old Sat Sep 01, 2018, 05:50pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 18,822
2018-19 Point Of Emphasis ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
If the defender is moving away from the offensive player and there is contact, he has not committed a foul whether he had previously had legal guarding position or not.
Good point, but I wanted to "Blind The Coach With Professionalism And Excessive Proper Terminology Verbiage" (legal guarding position) and leave him dumbfounded, sobbing, and quaking in his shoes. Coaches hate it when I do that to them. On the other hand, I love it.

(With apologies to Thomas Dolby)

(just another ref: Thanks for not correcting the part where the coach thinks that I look like George Clooney's identical twin.)
__________________
"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; Sun Sep 02, 2018 at 10:29am.
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
Story on Danger from Maple Bats SAump Baseball 13 Fri Jun 27, 2008 03:36am
Warning!! Danger!! Annual Off-topic Baseball Thread '07!! Beware!! ChuckElias Basketball 1764 Wed Jan 30, 2008 03:32pm
Warning!! Danger!! Annual Off-topic Hockey Thread '07!! Beware!! canuckrefguy Basketball 41 Fri Apr 20, 2007 09:23pm
Reminder about danger of lightning mikesears Football 3 Fri Sep 17, 2004 06:36am
Just putting this one out there... JugglingReferee Basketball 13 Wed Dec 20, 2000 01:05pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:42am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1