IAABO Survey Says …

[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...2F52h6Iw%3D%3D

IAABO Play Commentary Correct Answer: This is a foul on the player in white.

The Lead does an excellent job of recognizing where the competitive match-ups are in the lane area. He correctly employs the "ball side" mechanic and position-adjusts across the lane to officiate the low post play. (IAABO manual p. 35) This mechanic is underutilized by officials in today's game.

When it comes to post play, our goal is to be in a position to penalize the first foul. When the player in red begins to move up the lane, the player in white extends his left arm and illegally impedes his opponent. 63% of respondents had this as the correct ruling.

Unfortunately, it appears this illegal contact occurred as the Lead was observing high post screening activity before moving across the lane. After this initial illegal contact, both players engage in activity that could have been ruled a foul, which should be penalized with a double foul by the lead official. 26% of respondents had a double foul as a correct ruling.

This play shows how quickly contact can escalate and how when initial illegal contact is not enforced, players generally respond by committing illegal contact. Officials should continue to identify engaged competitive match-ups and make sure to position-adjust to see the whole play to get the first foul.

Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video: This is a foul on the player in white 63%. This is a double foul 26%. This is a foul on the player in red 7% (including me). No foul – play on 3%.

[JRutledge]

So basically our position on the foul being on white first was correct according to IAABO.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

So basically our position on the foul being on white first was correct according to IAABO.

Yes it was. I know that I was wrong with my comment that the first foul was on red, but I still think that a double foul is a good option here.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Yes it was. I know that I was wrong with my comment that the first foul was on red, but I still think that a double foul is a good option here.

If officials find themselves calling double fouls on post plays it's an indication they are recognizing the matchups late. It is very rare that both players are committing their first illegal contact at the same time.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

If officials find themselves calling double fouls on post plays it's an indication they are recognizing the matchups late. It is very rare that both players are committing their first illegal contact at the same time.

Apparently, that what may have happened here.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Unfortunately, it appears this illegal contact occurred as the Lead was observing high post screening activity before moving across the lane. After this initial illegal contact, both players engage in activity that could have been ruled a foul, which should be penalized with a double foul by the lead official. 26% of respondents had a double foul as a correct ruling.

In over forty years of high school (V, JV, Freshmen), middle school, recreation (boys and men), travel, and AAU games, I've probably called about forty double fouls.

Yes, I want to catch the first foul, but sometimes I don't, or can't.

It's just another tool, to be seldom used, in our tool belt.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

It is very rare that both players are committing their first illegal contact at the same time.

Sometimes in the split second it takes an official to mentally process the first contact as illegal contact and a foul (maybe it was close), and during that split second before the official sounds his whistle, the opponent "fouls back" (maybe even harder).

Sure we can go with the first foul and deal with the second foul as a complicated false double foul situation (with two whistles) if we decide if an intentional (or flagrant) foul is warranted (the only type of fouls we can charge during that dead ball after the first foul (not the whistle) makes the ball dead.

But sometimes it's just easier to call an "ordinary" double foul (one whistle) to clean up such action throughout the rest of the game between two such knuckleheads.

Neither player thinks he got away with something, they both got dinged (and both teams/coaches get dinged), which can help one to manage the rest of the game.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It's just another tool, to be seldom used, in our tool belt.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Raymond

If officials find themselves calling double fouls on post plays it's an indication they are recognizing the matchups late. It is very rare that both players are committing their first illegal contact at the same time.

And usually a cop-out from just calling what happened first or not recognizing it at all.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Yes it was. I know that I was wrong with my comment that the first foul was on red, but I still think that a double foul is a good option here.

I don't. Not with the way things took place in this play. Calling a double foul is a cop-out IMO. White pushed the opponent all the way out of the lane and then the red player reacted. Call the first foul and it is over.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

White pushed the opponent all the way out of the lane and then the red player reacted.

You saw it that way. Others saw it that way. The IAABO Co-Coordinators of Interpreters saw it that way. 63% of IAABO members that commented on the video saw it that way.

I didn't and I was most likely wrong. But I'm allowed some poor judgment occasionally, as long as I don't make a habit out of it, and I still don't quite see White's very first passive arm bar contact as a "definitive" foul (but wouldn't have an issue with anybody calling it as such). But I do see them going at each other simultaneously in the split seconds later, thus my change to a double foul call, as did (only) 26% of my colleagues.

4-19-8: A double personal foul is a situation in which two opponents commit personal fouls against each other at approximately the same time.

Probably wouldn't be the worst call I made in the season. Hopefully so, but probably not.