Fun With Free Throw Coverage ...
 

IAABO Make The Call Video

https://storage.googleapis.com/refqu...QALgGCr07W.mp4

Is this a Foul? Observe the action in the lane after the missed free throw attempt. Does the player in the gray uniform, who was located in the second lane space table side, commit a foul? Comment on the positioning of the officials and did the correct official make the ruling on the play.

Two choices: This is correctly ruled a foul. This is not a foul.

My comment: This is correctly ruled a foul. Tough, possibly game changing, call in the last minute of a tied game. Gray #1 illegally pushed White #20 with his left arm, preventing White #20 from getting the rebound. Initially I thought that this should have been called by the Trail, but the on replay I saw the Lead had a clear open look at the illegal contact.

Screwed The Pooch ...
 

Early comments from IAABO members have me in the minority, and it isn't even close. Maybe just me and the Lead in the video think this was a foul.

Guess I made a very serious, grievous, and irreversible mistake; causing a team to possibly lose due to my error. Thank God it's only a video and not a real game that I'm officiating.

Live and learn.

This is not really FT coverage, but rebounding coverage. The FT is over so you are not looking at the same things you would during the FT.

Peace

Blurred Lines (Robin Thicke And Pharrell Williams, 2013) ...
 

Somewhat agree.

The problem, in a two person game, is that the Lead's free throw responsibilities (free throw violations) end with the release (all the Lead's free throw responsibilities are rebounders on the lane lines), while the Trail's free throw responsibilities (free throw violations) end with the hit (the Trail's free throw responsibilities also include the shooter and the players behind the three point line), leaving a split second of possible mayhem when one (and only one) official is still watching for free throw violations (Trail) and the other (Lead, and only the Lead) has already turned his attention from free throw violations to rebounding fouls.

For a split second both official's have to wear two hats, covering one's free throw responsibility coverage area, while also covering one's "regular" (rebounding) primary coverage area, in essence "blurring" the basket line for a split second. That's why both officials (especially the Lead) back up to get wide angle open views on free throws. For a split second, it's mostly on the Lead (and only the Lead) to observe, recognize, and call rebounding fouls.

Once the free throw hits, both officials should be able go into "regular" (rebounding) primary coverage area mode, but if an official (often the Lead) already has his eye on a potential rebounding problem based on his free throw responsibility coverage area, he probably should keep his (wide angle fish-eye) eye on that potential rebounding problem rather than changing to his "regular" (rebounding) primary coverage area mode.

One of the many perils of a two person game. And we know that all too well here in Connecticut.

While free throw coverage, and rebounding coverage, are both important and interesting topics worthy of discussion, I'm distracted because I'm still pissed that I probably blew the call, and probably blew it badly. If I blow this call in the second period; I can live with that, the team has plenty of time to overcome my mistake. When I blow this call in the last minute of a tied game, I may lose some sleep that night because my blown call is "magnified" because the offended team may not have enough time to recover.

You have the same basic coverage in a 2 person as you would in a 3 person game. Even the third official is not likely to in a great position on these kinds of plays depending on where other players are located off the lane. On this kind of play the Trail in a 3 person could calls something but not sure this would be that obvious of a foul for them to call this.

I personally do not see a foul on any grey player, I see if anything a white player pushing out the opponent and that would not likely get me to call a foul. It seems to me the official penalized the player going for the ball because he was behind.

Peace

Over The Back, I Got Suckered In, No Such Thing ...
 

And I would bet you dollars to doughnuts that you would be correct. Maybe IAABO will forget to post a play commentary and a correct answer, and I can continue to fanaticize that I'm the best basketball official in the world.

And me commenting that this was a "tough call" won't help my cause because, based on the early comments from a large majority IAABO members that commented, this was not a very tough call after all, it was an easy this is not a foul "call".

"Yea, woe is unto me ..." (1 Corinthians 9:16)

https://cdn.inprnt.com/thumbs/f3/e7/...b5a0c4b9a6.jpg

Need A Good Night's Sleep ...
 

Looking for a way, any way, out of this mess that I've gotten myself into.

Double foul.

Just kidding.

No foul, and if there was a foul, the wrong official made the call. At least it wasn't a close game.

Always Listen To bob's Sarcasm ...
 

Hey, at least I got that part right.

Adding fuel to the fire with sharp, biting, witty, sarcasm.

Nice. I deserve it.

I don't see a foul.

Another defensive player comes in the lane and completely blocks the Lead'd view of the play, so he has no business blowing his whistle.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Need A Patient Whistle To See The Entire Play ...
 

With my perfect 20/20 hindsight, I agree.

If the Lead (based on his free throw responsibilities) called the contact of Gray #1 using his left arm to push White #20, then he had a clear open look at that contact for a split second before the other players got in his line of vision. Unfortunately for him, the players subsequently blocking his line of sight prevented him from seeing that the aftermath of the contact didn't really displace White #20 and put him at a rebounding disadvantage. After fulfilling his free throw responsibilities the Trail had a better look at the entire play and made the correct "no call".

IAABO Survey Says …
 

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

https://storage.googleapis.com/refqu...QALgGCr07W.mp4

IAABO Play Commentary

Correct Answer: This is not a foul.

This play demonstrates the importance of positioning to make accurate rulings. One of the most important concepts for ruling on rebound contact is the principle of verticality. (4-45) As the ball comes off the ring, there is contact between the two opponents in the lower spaces on the Trails side of the lane. Who was responsible for causing this contact? Which official had the best view?

The player (Gray #1) in the second space enters the lane and jumps vertically in an attempt to secure the rebound or to tap the ball. When you watch his movement, did he hinder or displace his opponent? The defensive rebounder (White #20) enters the lane, obtains a position, then moves back toward his airborne opponent. This is where the contact occurs. White #20 uses his lower torso and extends his right arm in an attempt to keep Gray #1 from securing the rebound. If there is a foul to be ruled on this play, it should be charged to White #20.

From the Lead's angle, Gray #1 is "on the back" is charged with a foul. The Trail official has a much better angle on the play and rules the contact to be incidental. The Lead should recognize his partner has a better angle and should "trust his partner" to rule on this contact.

It should be noted; the Trail was not properly positioned at the outset of the free throw. He was parallel to the free-throw line and did not have a good view of the top two spaces on the farther lane line. The Trail official should take a position approximately 3 feet behind the free-throw line extended and approximately halfway between the nearer free throw lane line and the sideline (IAABO manual pg 93). The Trail did close down toward the endline on the release and did end up in a good position to view the rebounding activity.

Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video: This is not a foul 86%. This is correctly ruled a foul 14% (including me).

That should read "incorrectly".

Quote, Unquote ...
 

Yes, it does sound odd, however 14% (including me) of IAABO members that commented on the video selected this choice, the wrong choice: This is correctly ruled a foul.

"This is incorrectly ruled a foul" was never a choice, and is, in essence, the same as This is not a foul, the only other choice.

https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.D...=0&w=268&h=174

Bottom line, this is not a foul by the player from behind. It just looks like he is jumping and makes little to no contact in the process. I think that is Raymond's point.

Peace