Fun With Being Run Over By A Truck …

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by 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...xpL8QOUg%3D%3D

IAABO Play Commentary: Correct Answer: This is a player control foul.

In this play, The defender is in the path of the ball handler, has both feet on the floor with the front of her torso facing the opponent when contact ensues on the defender's torso. By rule, the defender obtained a legal guarding position. (4-23-2) The Lead official has a very good angle to view the contact and properly rules this contact as a player control foul. (4-19-6)

The Lead does improperly uses the team control foul signal at the site of the foul. The proper signal would be the player control foul signal. (IAABO Manual p. 239)

Many respondents considered this a blocking foul because the defender moved forward just before contact. This would be correct if the defender were still moving forward when the contact occurred. In slow motion, it shows a better view of the defender moving forward to a “new spot” on the floor, then stopping before the contact occurs on her torso. 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) Since the defender got to the spot first and her opponent had the ball, the defender did not need to give the ball handler time and distance to avoid the contact. (4-23-4a)

Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video: This is a player control foul 82% (including me). This is a blocking foul 18%. No foul (play on) 0%.

Billy:

I am shocked the 18% of our fellow IAABO brothers and sisters got this incorrect. Especially since I helped the late Ed Ferrigno give block/charge seminars at IAABO Annual Meetings as well watched the late Edgar Cartotto and the late Danny Doss give block/charge seminars at IAABO Annual Meetings and Camps where I was a staffer.

MTD, Sr.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I am shocked the 18% of our fellow IAABO brothers and sisters got this incorrect.

Many respondents considered this a blocking foul because the defender moved forward just before contact. This would be correct if the defender were still moving forward when the contact occurred. In slow motion, it shows a better view of the defender moving forward to a “new spot” on the floor, then stopping before the contact occurs on her torso.

Maybe they didn't take advantage of the slow motion view?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Many respondents considered this a blocking foul because the defender moved forward just before contact. This would be correct if the defender were still moving forward when the contact occurred. In slow motion, it shows a better view of the defender moving forward to a “new spot” on the floor, then stopping before the contact occurs on her torso.

Maybe they didn't take advantage of the slow motion view?

And those who had attended Ed, Edgar, and Danny's presentations would know that per NFHS and NCAA Men's/Women's Rules that this is a: CHARGE!!

MTD, Sr.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

And those who had attended Ed, Edgar, and Danny's presentations would know that per NFHS and NCAA Men's/Women's Rules that this is a: CHARGE!!

If one just sees the defender moving forward and doesn't see the defender stopping short of contact, and just incorrectly sees the defender moving forward with contact, one can be fooled into incorrectly believing that this is a block. Even the IAABO "Gang of Four" admitted that it was easier to see this in slow motion.

Everybody is familiar with slow motion. It's how Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. runs on the court. Wait ... I'm being told ... You too? Me too? Never mind.