Fun With A Mismatch …

[BillyMac]

Is White #1 properly charged with an "off ball" foul on this play? Does he foul more than once on this play?

https://storage.googleapis.com/refqu...FOyDDbyA%3D%3D

Two choices: This is not a foul on White No. 1. White No. 1 commits multiple fouls on this play.

My comment: White No. 1 commits multiple fouls on this play. Holding foul.

[bob jenkins]

Yes, multiple fouls.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Is White #1 properly charged with an "off ball" foul on this play? Does he foul more than once on this play?

https://storage.googleapis.com/refqu...FOyDDbyA%3D%3D

Two choices: This is not a foul on White No. 1. White No. 1 commits multiple fouls on this play.

My comment: White No. 1 commits multiple fouls on this play. Holding foul.

Not quite five seconds into the video is the first Holding Foul by W1 against R1. Get that first PF, a CF in this play, and we do not have the second PF by W1.

Let me add this: In the first PF that was not called. The play started with both W1 and R1 standing with W1 left arm stretched out in front of R1, while this can be construed as Holding it is not Holding until R1 attempts to move through W1's outstretched arm and W1 fails to drop his arm: That is then the Holding Foul.

MTD, Sr.

[MOVBlue]

While adhering to the letter of the letter, I am not crazy about that foul. White is leaning and has a wrap, but Red is standing wider than his shoulders and not attempting much of anything other than standing there. Now, attempt to throw him the ball, or have him attempt to move and be restricted, that's a foul. But just standing there in the post attempting nothing I probably talk to them both about it during the action -- "Easy down here in the post guys!! EASY!" - Then if red tries throwing in there and there is a restriction I would crack it.

Generally speaking, that's how it would be handled in my neck of the woods.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by MOVBlue

I am not crazy about that foul. White is leaning and has a wrap, but Red is standing wider than his shoulders and not attempting much of anything other than standing there. Now, attempt to throw him the ball, or have him attempt to move and be restricted, that's a foul.

I see your point, but, especially on the far side of the lane, White is definitely holding, actually holding with two arms at one point. After they move over to the near side of the lane the holding is definitely less severe, but it's still there. I wish that Lead had caught the earlier foul.

Give White #1 some credit. He's trying to be an aggressive pest, like a mosquito, or a gnat, defending an opponent almost a foot taller than he. You've got to love his guts, his confidence, and unabashed effort.

“Everybody pulls for David, nobody roots for Goliath.” (Wilt Chamberlain)

[JRutledge]

I saw no displacement or restriction. I just saw a smaller player trying to keep his position.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I saw no ... restriction.

Watch White's left arm at the 3 second video mark (4:30 game clock mark), preventing Red from moving from the far low post to the high post.

Wasn't whistled, but probably should have been called.

On the other hand, the call that was whistled by the Lead at the end of the video, in the near side low post, was probably questionable.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Watch White's left arm at the 3 second video mark (4:30 game clock mark), preventing Red from moving from the far low post to the high post.

Wasn't whistled, but probably should have been called.

On the other hand, the call that was whistled by the Lead at the end of the video, in the near side low post, was probably questionable.

The last contact was more egregious than the thing you referenced. I do not see any such restriction or prevention to getting to the next spot. Not saying it would not be a concern, but I see nothing that fits a foul at that time or at the end. Then again maybe there was some previous action that fit this foul. I just did not see it pulling it out of a game we have not seen the entire package.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The last contact was more egregious than the thing you referenced. I do not see any such restriction or prevention to getting to the next spot. Not saying it would not be a concern, but I see nothing that fits a foul at that time or at the end. Then again maybe there was some previous action that fit this foul. I just did not see it pulling it out of a game we have not seen the entire package.

Judgment is why we get the big bucks and why JRutledge has worked a lot more state finals (also in multiple sports) than me (zero).

Also why I've never been on the cover of Referee Magazine (although I'm a lot more handsome now that I spend a lot of time wearing a mask).

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Judgement is why we get the big bucks and why you've worked a lot more state finals (also in multiple sports) than me (zero). Also why I've never been on the cover of Referee Magazine.

The back of my head was on the cover. Billy was the main guy on the cover. I just gave him some information and was in the picture.

That being said not saying that people cannot disagree. Maybe there were other plays that fit that action as a foul. I just think if they are standing there and the player in black never tries to get to another spot or reposition, then we are calling a foul on a player that did nothing. Once he moves and cannot get there, blow the whistle. But them playing patty cake does not do it for me. Maybe there is just more to this foul that we are not seeing?

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The back of my head was on the cover.

And a fine looking back of the head it was.

If I recall it was the year we went to the stop the clock signal before the held ball signal. With a still cover photo, we couldn't tell if the signal sequence was correct. Care to share JRutledge?

Originally Posted by JRutledge

That being said not saying that people cannot disagree.

Olde English proverb: One man's meat is another man's poison.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Also why I've never been on the cover of Referee Magazine.

But I have been on a magazine cover.

[BillyMac]

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...FOyDDbyA%3D%3D

IAABO International Play Commentary: Correct Answer: White No. 1 commits multiple fouls on this play.

It is not legal to extend the arms fully or partially in a position other than vertical so that the freedom of movement of an opponent is hindered when contact with the arms occurs. (4-24-6)

On a couple of occasions during this play sequence, White #1 inhibits his opponent's freedom of movement by extending the arm horizontally around the player's waist area. This is a foul and was properly ruled by the Lead official.

Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video: White No. 1 commits multiple fouls on this play 91% (including me). This is not a foul on White No. 1 9%.