The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 15, 2018, 12:09pm
CJP CJP is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 275
Shooter landing on defender laying on floor

With 5 seconds left in 2nd quarter, A1 is shooting a free throw. The ball comes off the rim and a scramble ensues. Players are on the floor. A2 gains possession and gets a shot off before buzzer. When coming back to the floor, A2 lands on B1. B1 did not slide or roll under A2. A2 rather "floated" over B1 while in the air. I had a no call. There was some discussion at half time that it should have been a foul on B1. We agreed to disagree, it was only a discussion.

I am looking at rules and case plays trying to find an answer. I am okay with a no call but following the logic in case play 10.7.1 a foul could actually be called on A2.

Thoughts??
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 15, 2018, 12:19pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,934
There's A Difference Between Being Tripped, And Tripping …

Quote:
Originally Posted by CJP View Post
With 5 seconds left in 2nd quarter, A1 is shooting a free throw. The ball comes off the rim and a scramble ensues. Players are on the floor. A2 gains possession and gets a shot off before buzzer. When coming back to the floor, A2 lands on B1. B1 did not slide or roll under A2. A2 rather "floated" over B1 while in the air. I had a no call. There was some discussion at half time that it should have been a foul on B1.
We have discussed this several times here on the Forum.

In a high school game, there is no foul by B1 in this specific situation.

NFHS 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.

There has been heated debate on this issue:

https://forum.officiating.com/basket...tml#post973473

NCAA rules may vary.
__________________
"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 Dec 15, 2018 at 12:33pm.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 15, 2018, 12:30pm
CJP CJP is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
We have discussed this several times here on the Forum. In a high school game, there is no foul by B1 in this specific situation.

NFHS 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.

NCAA rules may vary.
The "new" 10.7.1 situation A is more applicable in this situation, in my opinion. Which is why I mentioned that if there is a foul, it could be charged to A2. I am still okay with a no call.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 15, 2018, 12:30pm
9/11 - Never Forget
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 5,642
Send a message via Yahoo to grunewar
Just discussed this type of play during our pre-game last night.......
__________________
There was the person who sent ten puns to friends, with the hope that at least one of the puns would make them laugh. No pun in ten did.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 15, 2018, 12:39pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,934
Old Casebook Plays Never Die, They Just Fade Away …

(With apologies to General Douglas MacArthur.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
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.
This is yet another "The Case Of the Unannounced Disappearing For No Known Reason Casebook Play". No apparent rule change. No NFHS announcement. No replacement caseplay. No new interpretation. No NFHS cancellation of the old interpretation. Last appeared in the 2004-05 (goes back to at least 1996-97) NFHS casebook. And then, Penn and Teller made it disappear. 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.)? On the other hand, how is an experienced official who used this interpretation for the many years that it was in the casebook supposed to know that the interpretation has changed?

Get comfortable everybody, because the movie is about to begin, and it going to be a long movie. Almost as long as Gone With The Wind. I'm the guy who looks just like George Clooney.

Spoiler alert, there won't be any closure at the end, just some well thought out opinions from both the protagonists and the antagonists, many of whom are reliable posters on the Forum.

__________________
"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 Dec 15, 2018 at 03:11pm.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 15, 2018, 04:43pm
AremRed
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Foul. You can’t play legal defense laying on the ground. The “entitled to your spot on the floor” clause does not apply to a player on the ground IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 15, 2018, 05:23pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by AremRed View Post
Foul. You can’t play legal defense laying on the ground. The “entitled to your spot on the floor” clause does not apply to a player on the ground IMO.
Your opinion, in this case is wrong. As Billy's citation above confirms, the NFHS has made it clear that even a player lying down is entitled to his/her spot. A1 doesn't get to jump on B1 just because B1 is lying on the floor and get the benefit of a foul call.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 15, 2018, 06:44pm
LRZ LRZ is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: SE PA
Posts: 768
NFHS made it clear--until the case disappeared from the book. How much weight do you give a 15 year-old interpretation that many officials, having started after the case's disappearance, will not know about? And why was the case removed? Because it was no longer a valid interpretation? How are we to know?
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 15, 2018, 08:48pm
This IS My Social Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at L, T, or C
Posts: 2,379
Quote:
Originally Posted by AremRed View Post
Foul. You can’t play legal defense laying on the ground. The “entitled to your spot on the floor” clause does not apply to a player on the ground IMO.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't NCAA-M have a casebook citation validing AremRed's "IMO"? I think so.
It's just that NFHS doesn't. Though it did.
__________________
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
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 15, 2018, 08:50pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by LRZ View Post
NFHS made it clear--until the case disappeared from the book. How much weight do you give a 15 year-old interpretation that many officials, having started after the case's disappearance, will not know about? And why was the case removed? Because it was no longer a valid interpretation? How are we to know?
Philosophies and principles remain unless and until something says otherwise. If we limited how we do things and how things are called to only what is in the rule book and case book, the game would look dramatically different than it does. Cases are removed due to space limitations. When they are reversed, there is typically a case expressing the new ruling. Without that, it is still valid.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 15, 2018, 09:59pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJP View Post
With 5 seconds left in 2nd quarter, A1 is shooting a free throw. The ball comes off the rim and a scramble ensues. Players are on the floor. A2 gains possession and gets a shot off before buzzer. When coming back to the floor, A2 lands on B1. B1 did not slide or roll under A2. A2 rather "floated" over B1 while in the air. I had a no call. There was some discussion at half time that it should have been a foul on B1. We agreed to disagree, it was only a discussion.

I am looking at rules and case plays trying to find an answer. I am okay with a no call but following the logic in case play 10.7.1 a foul could actually be called on A2.

Thoughts??
Clearly A2 did not jump vertically so how could it be a foul on B1? If anything could be argued, it would be that A2 did not participate in the principle of verticality and jumped on B1. Ergo, a foul on A2.
__________________
If some rules are never enforced, then why do they exist?
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 15, 2018, 10:20pm
CJP CJP is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by bucky View Post
Clearly A2 did not jump vertically so how could it be a foul on B1? If anything could be argued, it would be that A2 did not participate in the principle of verticality and jumped on B1. Ergo, a foul on A2.
In my opinion, it is not a foul on B1.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 16, 2018, 09:03am
LRZ LRZ is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: SE PA
Posts: 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
Philosophies and principles remain unless and until something says otherwise. If we limited how we do things and how things are called to only what is in the rule book and case book, the game would look dramatically different than it does. Cases are removed due to space limitations. When they are reversed, there is typically a case expressing the new ruling. Without that, it is still valid.
You may be right, but I would like to see some authority for this. Is this an opinion or a fact?

In any event, even if you are correct, how would you answer the question that BillyMac always brings up: how are newer officials to know?
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 16, 2018, 10:07am
CJP CJP is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by LRZ View Post
You may be right, but I would like to see some authority for this. Is this an opinion or a fact?

In any event, even if you are correct, how would you answer the question that BillyMac always brings up: how are newer officials to know?
Have you read 10.7.1 A?
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 16, 2018, 10:39am
LRZ LRZ is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: SE PA
Posts: 768
Yes, I have read 10.7.1A. It does not say that cases remain applicable after they disappear from case books. The authority I asked for is about the position that cases remain valid even after they are no longer in the book.

Nor does 10.7.1A say that players who have fallen are entitled to that position, as did the previous case. It may be interpreted that way, but it is in no way as clear as 10.6.1E.

You seem to be saying that 10.7.1A controls; Camron Rust seems to be saying that 10.6.1E still controls. I was responding to the latter.
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
Shooter landing on a player who flopped BDevil15 Basketball 25 Mon Jan 09, 2017 04:47pm
Laying on a defender bigjohn Football 3 Wed Sep 11, 2013 11:44am
Player Laying on the Floor Da Official Basketball 32 Thu Dec 02, 2010 04:51pm
Jab by the defender on the jump shooter (non-contact) FrankHtown Basketball 44 Thu Apr 02, 2009 06:31am
Shooter jumps into the airborne defender zanzibar Basketball 39 Sun Jan 23, 2005 01:58pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:35pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1