Fun With A Pass And Crash …

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree. Yes they do. I thought that "obtained and maintained" covered it.

While not incorrect, it was, perhaps, too general a statement, one that needed further explanation, and I was happy to oblige for the greater good of the cause.

You used "obtained and maintained" specifically in regards to what happened before A1 went airborne and then used words like "it doesn't matter" in regards to what happens before the contact.


"However, even if Blue #10 was still airborne, my opinion is that White #1 obtained and maintained legal guarding position before Blue #10 became airborne, so to me, it doesn't matter if Blue #10 was still airborne at contact...."

Me, if I'm training someone, I say defender "obtained" LGP BEFORE A1 went airborne and MAINTAINED LGP while A1 was airborne and until contact.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

I say defender "obtained" LGP before A1 went airborne and maintained LGP while A1 was airborne and until contact.

And you would be saying it correctly.

My initial answer was unclear.

While I knew what I meant, I didn't write what I meant.

Haste makes waste.

Thanks for the correction/clarification, for me, and for the greater good of the Forum cause.

[BillyMac]

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...O0M%2F5w%3D%3D

IAABO Play Commentary

Correct Answer: This is a Charge.

Blue #10 drives into the lane and jumps to pass the ball to a teammate in the lane. The defender obtains a legal guarding position (2 feet on the floor, facing the opponent) before Blue #10 became airborne. (4-23-5d) Since the defender obtained a legal guarding position, Blue #10 is responsible for the contact. In NFHS rules, this would be a team control foul. (4-19-7)

A high percentage of respondents ruled this play to be a player control foul. A player-control foul is a common foul committed by a player while he/she is in control of the ball or by an airborne shooter. (4-19-6) Even though the administration of the penalties is the same as the team control foul, it is not accurate to refer to this as a player control foul. Blue #10 no longer had control of the ball once he released the ball on the pass. (4-12-1, 4-12-2b) Had Blue #10 released the ball on a try for goal instead of a pass and then charged, a player control foul would have been committed by rule.

Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video: This is a Charge 41% (including me). This is Player Control foul 39%. This is incidental contact (NCC - No Call Correct) 13%. This is a Blocking foul 5%. This is a Flop 2%.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Maybe IAABO wants to highlight that while all player control fouls are team control fouls the reverse is not always true (all team control fouls are not always player control fouls). A few early returns from IAABO members who have already commented show that a few are confused by this principle.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

... 17% of IAABO officials will think this is a PC foul despite the pass ...

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Let's see if the 17% prediction holds up. I hope that 17% is too high (I'm a rose colored glasses kind of guy), but it might be a good over/under.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video: ... This is Player Control foul 39% ...

Wow! Who bet the over?

[BillyMac]

Since the administration of the penalties is the same for both team control fouls and player control fouls, in the heat of a real game, it's nothing more than a minor faux pas for an official to give the wrong signal, or the wrong verbal description.

But this isn't in the heat of a real game, it's a video situation that can be played and replayed, and where multiple choice answers point to a differentiation of the two type of fouls, and I am very disappointing in the survey results.

Any official that gets this wrong can still be a great official, a great partner, well respected by assigners, colleagues, coaches, and players, but seeing such poor survey results still leaves me scratching my head and wondering, "What going on?".

[JRutledge]

For the record, at the NCAA Men's level and under the CCA Mechanics, the signal for TC and PC fouls are exactly the same. It is the hand behind the head no matter what kind of foul you are calling. Terminology is different, but it must be noted that the officials are not supposed to just point as in the past.

Peace

[BillyMac]

... a candy mint and a breath mint.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

For the record, at the NCAA Men's level and under the CCA Mechanics, the signal for TC and PC fouls are exactly the same. It is the hand behind the head no matter what kind of foul you are calling.

I believe tht the NFHS Rules Committee had a suggestion on the table to have one signal for both, but it was the "punch" signal.

We'll find out in a few weeks if the suggestion was approved.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Do you know what changes are on the agenda at the NFHS Rule Committee?

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Eliminate player control signal...use only team control signal