Fun With Continuous Motion …

[BillyMac]

Disclaimer: For IAABO eyes only. 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...p8ZGXuCg%3D%3D

IAABO Play Commentary Correct Answer: This is an accurate ruling.

If an opponent fouls after a player has started a try or tap for field goal, he/she is permitted to complete the customary arm movement, and if pivoting or stepping when fouled, may complete the usual foot or body movement in any activity while holding the ball. These privileges are granted only when the usual throwing motion has started before the foul occurs and before the ball is in flight. (4-11)

When the officials signal a foul has occurred, the ball handler is a step or two beyond the defender and is in the act of shooting. By counting the goal, the Trail official ruled that the ball handler had ended the dribble and was stepping toward the goal when the foul occurred.

The other aspect of the play is the double whistle. The official who is ruling within their PCA should be primarily responsible for the ruling. The official ruling outside their PCA should generally drop their signal and defer to the primary official to signal the infraction. (2020-21 IAABO manual p. 23 13.b) The Trail should have deferred to the Lead to make this ruling in this play, as the play occurred in the Lead's PCA.

Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video: This is an accurate ruling 53% (including me). This ruling is inaccurate 47%.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video: This ruling is inaccurate 47%.

Wow!

When one looks up continuous motion in the dictionary, there's a picture of this play.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Disclaimer: For IAABO eyes only. 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...p8ZGXuCg%3D%3D

IAABO Play Commentary Correct Answer: This is an accurate ruling.

If an opponent fouls after a player has started a try or tap for field goal, he/she is permitted to complete the customary arm movement, and if pivoting or stepping when fouled, may complete the usual foot or body movement in any activity while holding the ball. These privileges are granted only when the usual throwing motion has started before the foul occurs and before the ball is in flight. (4-11)

When the officials signal a foul has occurred, the ball handler is a step or two beyond the defender and is in the act of shooting. By counting the goal, the Trail official ruled that the ball handler had ended the dribble and was stepping toward the goal when the foul occurred.

The other aspect of the play is the double whistle. The official who is ruling within their PCA should be primarily responsible for the ruling. The official ruling outside their PCA should generally drop their signal and defer to the primary official to signal the infraction. (2020-21 IAABO manual p. 23 13.b) The Trail should have deferred to the Lead to make this ruling in this play, as the play occurred in the Lead's PCA.

Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video: This is an accurate ruling 53% (including me). This ruling is inaccurate 47%.

The reason that officials are nearly 50/50 on the ruling of this play is because the foul occurs before the shooting motion, but the whistle sounds while the player begins to try for goal. We feel that it would be unfair to take this basket away because the player has a clear path to an easy goal when the contact occurs. I would suggest that this play is an excellent example of the old Tower philosophy which advocates officials calling plays according to advantage/disadvantage. Under that this minimal contact should be ignored and the offensive player be permitted to continue unhindered towards an easy score. On the other hand, officiating strictly by the book would have an official whistle this contact as a foul prior to the act of shooting and thus negate the easy goal.

I will note that the IAABO ruling cites the incorrect moment at which to judge if the act of shooting had begun. The correct point is not when the official signals, but rather when the illegal contact occurs.

[JRutledge]

If this is where the foul occurred, he never puts the ball back down to the floor. Count the basket IMO.

Didn't put this on my YouTube Page



Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If this is where the foul occurred, he never puts the ball back down to the floor. Count the basket IMO.

While dribbling after the foul would clearly demonstrate that the shooting motion had not begun prior to the foul, not dribbling after the foul is not conclusive proof that the throwing motion had begun and is not the proper standard by which to judge this play. I've heard that the NBA uses that guideline, but the NBA continuation rule is different from that of the NFHS and NCAA. For a HS game, we need to follow the HS rule.

The NFHS rules book states:
"These privileges are granted only when the usual throwing motion has started before the foul occurs and before the ball is in flight."

So show me when the player with the ball starts his throwing motion. That is not the same as merely catching the ball to end a dribble. That action happens before passing the ball too, so we can't know that the player is trying for goal simply from that. We must see more.

When in this video do we first see some kind of movement which indicates that the player is attempting to throw the ball towards the goal?

Does the foul occur before or after that moment?

[JRutledge]

All I am saying is if when I show the picture, the foul took place, the habitual motion IMO has started.

My understanding the NBA uses the very same standard that is in our rules at the NF and NCAA levels. The NBA might use different language, but if you are fouled and you have stopped dribbling, (the NBA might call it a "gather."), but the line of demarcation is basically the same. If a player is fouled and clearly was going up to shoot the entire time, why split hairs and say it was before the shooting motion?

And yes we may not know for sure, but I think we have some indicators that make this easier if we use them. Of course, a player could pass, but if they do so then they are likely making a motion to pass or trying to pass the ball, which then I will let the player's action dictate what I call. Yes, I know there is a case play that says that should not be a factor, but usually, players that are trying to shoot clearly shoot the ball, or if they can't, we get paid to make those decisions.

All I am saying here is that in the video if the foul took place when the defender reached out, he clearly was in the motion to shoot. If he dribbles again, that is an indication he was not yet trying to shoot when fouled. We can try to be "pure" but that to me leads to inconsistent application.

Peace

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I will note that the IAABO ruling cites the incorrect moment at which to judge if the act of shooting had begun. The correct point is not when the official signals, but rather when the illegal contact occurs.

I know this play is NFHS, but for completeness sake -- in NCAAW, the time of the foul is when the whistle sounds.

I do agree on trying to determine if the contact caused a disadvantage, and /or deciding that the disadvantage happened a few feet after the initial contact

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

... in NCAAW, the time of the foul is when the whistle sounds.

Always to listen to bob, especially in dealing with NCAA-W.

However.

Even if the official decides to have a patient whistle and to see the entire play unfold? What if the official spits out his whistle, or forgets to put the whistle in his mouth (happened to me at least once after talking to a polite coach during a live ball), or sneezes, or was breathing in at the time of the foul?

I wish that I got a dollar every time that I said to coaches in high school games over forty years, "Yes, it was a late whistle coach, but it was the correct call".

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Always to listen to bob, especially in dealing with NCAA-W.

However.

Even if the official decides to have a patient whistle and to see the entire play unfold? What if the official spits out his whistle, or forgets to put the whistle in his mouth (happened tom me at least once after talking to a polite coach during a live ball), or sneezes, or was breathing in at the time of the foul?

I very much dislike the NCAA-W (and I think M, too) interpretation here. It leads to what I think are many undesirable results.

Some examples...B4 and A4, fighting for rebounding position, commit a foul. The shot is successful and falls through the basket. Then the official's whistle is sounded. The whistle was patient because they were just watching the play and deciding if it needed to be called and, it was too rough, so they call it. Now, by rule, the ball is dead when the try was successful. Since the foul is deemed to have occurred at the time of the whistle, this becomes a dead ball contact foul.

A2 sets a screen for A1 who is receiving a pass. B2 pushes through the screen before the pass reaches A1. A1 then catches the ball and shoots it. The whistle is sounded only once A1 has shot the ball. This means A1's shot counts and A2 gets the benefit of the foul as well. Then, on the next trip down, the situations are reversed but the calling official is a little quicker with the whistle and sounds it prior to the act of shooting....dead ball, no shot. You have the exact same play with two outcomes where the difference is not based on what the players did but on how quickly an official blew the whistle.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Some examples...B4 and A4, fighting for rebounding position, commit a foul. The shot is successful and falls through the basket. Then the official's whistle is sounded. The whistle was patient because they were just watching the play and deciding if it needed to be called and, it was too rough, so they call it. Now, by rule, the ball is dead when the try was successful. Since the foul is deemed to have occurred at the time of the whistle, this becomes a dead ball contact foul.

Fouls during this period are "normal" personal fouls in NCAAW. Adjudicate as if the ball were live.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Fouls during this period are "normal" personal fouls in NCAAW. Adjudicate as if the ball were live.

Ok, for how long are they "normal" fouls?

What about the 2nd example? Was my conclusion correct? That you get a different ruling on exactly the same play based on how quickly the official blows the whistle?