Fun With Fouls ...
 

https://storage.googleapis.com/refqu...hyLSEPdsvO.mp4

Blocking foul? Player control foul? Incidental contact?

Tough call. Red #2 never faced his opponent, but was the shooter put at a disadvantage?

I've got incidental contact, but of those IAABO members who have already commented on the video, it looks like all three choices are being seriously considered.

Does anybody find it odd that White's numbers are blurred out?

The defender (black uniform) backs up. Foul on black

Airborne Shooter ...
 

Baby steps (missed that, had to go back and look), but you're right, always protect the airborne shooter.

Yep, very noticeable.

I've worked a few camps on that court. Home to Lenny Moore, Stu Jackson, and Donyell Marshall.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Why is backing up a defensive foul?

I'm merely describing the movement that makes the resulting contact a foul on the player who is on defense in this video.

Always Listen To bob ...
 

I believe that bob jenkins was describing the movement of the defensive player as backing up (in relation to his body's stance, he was facing the basket; not backing up in relation to extending the distance between the defensive player and the shooter) toward the shooter.

IAABO International Play Commentary ...
 

Disclaimer: For IAABO Eyes Only. Below is not a NFHS interpretation, it's only an IAABO International interpretation which obviously doesn't mean a hill of beans to most members of this Forum.

https://storage.googleapis.com/refqu...hyLSEPdsvO.mp4

IAABO International Play Commentary: This is a Blocking Foul. This is an interesting play with numerous teaching points. As the play develops, the defender (Red #2) is initially focused on the ball handler driving to the basket. As the ball handler ends his dribble and throws an "alley-oop" pass (off the backboard) to a teammate, the defender now finds himself in the path of an airborne player attempting to catch the ball and attempt a try for goal.

Did Red #2 ever obtain a legal guarding position (LGP) on the airborne player attempting the try? No. The front of the defender's torso never faced the opponent, and therefore LGP was never obtained. (4-23-2b)

Does this mean the defender will automatically be responsible for the contact? No. Officials should be reminded that every player is entitled to a spot on the playing court provided such player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent. (4-23-1, 4-37-3) It should be further noted, the player in red could also be considered in a legal rebounding position. Obtaining a legal rebounding position is similar to obtaining a legal guarding position, with one notable exception. There is no requirement to face their opponent to obtain a legal rebounding position. (4-37-2) Even though the defender never obtained LGP, his initial position in the lane was legal.

Had the defender maintained this position throughout the play, the shooter would have been responsible for the contact that occurred. However, it appears the defender moves slightly to a new position after the opponent became airborne, resulting in the defender being responsible for the contact. Due to this movement under an airborne player, the Lead official correctly ruled a blocking foul on this play.

Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video: Blocking Foul: 58%; Incidental Contact: 23% (including me); Player Control: 19%