Airborne shooter

[RookieDude]

I think we discussed the following situation a year or two ago. A fellow official asked me about it last week and I told him how I would call it...see if you guys agree.

A1 leaves the ground to shoot or pass the ball. In midair, A1 decides to pass the ball to A2. B1 has legal guarding position in the path of A1. A1 passes the ball and then crashes into B1.

I told my fellow official that A1 would have commited a player control foul.

We had some discussions here concerning A1 leaving the ground, with no intention of shooting in our judgement, passing the ball to A2 and crashing into B1. If I remember correctly...some say yay, some say nay.

My thinking is A1 had "Control" of the ball when he/she left the ground...and would be under the same type of restrictions as an airborne shooter...therefore, player control on A1 even though A1 had passed the ball.

Case Book Definitions: 4.1.1 RULING: A1 is an airborne shooter when the ball is released until he/she returns to the floor.

Different Case, but could use the terminology to support statement. Such as "Airborne passer"?

Comments?

RD

[tomegun]

I don't think that's a player control foul. An airborn shooter has to shoot or be in the shooting motion. A player who jumps is an airborn player and the contact would be a push (I was actually told this is a charge and an airborn shooter commits a player control foul which would contradict the whole block/charge discussion making it a block/player control discussion). IMHO the only thing we can go by is what the player does and not what we think the player was going to do. It would be easier to explain to both coaches that the player passed the ball and we are going to shoot free throws, if you are in the bonus, rather than telling the coaches it is a player control foul.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by RookieDude

A1 leaves the ground to shoot or pass the ball. In midair, A1 decides to pass the ball to A2. B1 has legal guarding position in the path of A1. A1 passes the ball and then crashes into B1.

I told my fellow official that A1 would have commited a player control foul.

Nope, completely wrong.

Rule 4-19-6 --"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".

Quite simply, A1 didn't shoot; he passed the ball. It doesn't matter whether he was in the air or not when he passed.If the ball has left A1's hands before the contact was made ,it's not a player control foul.Do you see "pass" covered anywhere in the definition of a try(R4-40-1)? Not likely! Casebook play 4.19.6SitB covers the play exactly.

If the FED had wanted to cover airborne passers under player-control fouls, they would have done so. If the same play had occured in the backcourt, and an airborne passer ran into a defensive player after they passed the ball, would you call a PC foul too, using the same reasoning?

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Dec 24th, 2003 at 07:01 AM]

[RookieDude]

Actually JR, you quoted the CASE play that I belive backs up what I am saying.
4.19.6 SIT B describes A1 passing the ball, but nowhere describes A1 as having left the ground...that is why it is NOT a player control foul, because A1 has NOT left the ground before he/she passed the ball.

RULIING: "The foul on A1 in both (a) and (b) is not a player control foul as A1 was not holding or dribbling the ball AND was NOT an airborne shooter in either situation."

This leads me to believe had A1 BEEN an airborne shooter the RULING would have been different. Do you see what I mean?

Again right from the Case book "A1 is an airborne shooter when the ball is released until he/she returns to the floor."

RD





[Edited by RookieDude on Dec 24th, 2003 at 07:38 AM]

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by RookieDude
Actually JR, you quoted the CASE play that I belive backs up what I am saying.
4.19.6 SIT B describes A1 passing the ball, but nowhere describes A1 as having left the ground...that is why it is NOT a player control foul, because A1 has NOT left the ground before he/she passed the ball.

RULIING: "The foul on A1 in both (a) and (b) is not a player control foul as A1 was not holding or dribbling the ball AND was NOT an airborne shooter in either situation."

This leads me to believe had A1 BEEN an airborne shooter the RULING would have been different. Do you see what I mean?

Dude, that casebook play is all-inclusive. It doesn't matter if A1 has one foot on the ground, 2 feet on the ground, or is airborne. If A1 PASSES the ball before the contact, he quite simply was NEVER an airborne shooter.

Now, answer my other question. Would you call this a PC foul if the player passing the ball off was back around his own FT line when the airborne contact occurred?

[RookieDude]

Sure, I could call a PC on a player that "had control when he left the floor" passed the ball in the air and then crashed into a defender that had established legal guarding position before the player had left the floor.

I don't think that would be a tough sell for me. (In fact have done that very thing without nary a word from either coach.)

RD

P.S. Won't be on the board until tonight...leaving work...maybe there will be some brave souls today (or foolish ones) to take my side of this debate.


[Edited by RookieDude on Dec 24th, 2003 at 07:58 AM]

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by RookieDude
Sure, I could call a PC on a player that "had control when he left the floor" passed the ball in the air and then crashed into a defender that had established legal guarding position before the player had left the floor.

I don't think that would be a tough sell for me. (In fact have done that very thing without nary a word from either coach.)

You've already made that call on a pass-n-crash in the back court?

Oh, my!

[tomegun]

This is not a PC foul. An airborn or grounded passer is just that a passer and it should be a offensive foul.

[JugglingReferee]

The way I've called this one is that it is not a PC foul, and the term used is a charge and this foul could have B shooting a 1-and-1.

[Bart Tyson]

Originally posted by RookieDude
Sure, I could call a PC on a player that "had control when he left the floor" passed the ball in the air and then crashed into a defender that had established legal guarding position before the player had left the floor.

I don't think that would be a tough sell for me. (In fact have done that very thing without nary a word from either coach.)

[Edited by RookieDude on Dec 24th, 2003 at 07:58 AM]

Coaches, for the most part are clueless, so I wouldn't hang your hat of good judgement with the coaches. Calling a PC on a player without the ball and did not shoot the ball is just plain wrong.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by RookieDude
Sure, I could call a PC on a player that "had control when he left the floor" passed the ball in the air and then crashed into a defender that had established legal guarding position before the player had left the floor.

I don't think that would be a tough sell for me. (In fact have done that very thing without nary a word from either coach.)

RD

P.S. Won't be on the board until tonight...leaving work...maybe there will be some brave souls today (or foolish ones) to take my side of this debate.


[Edited by RookieDude on Dec 24th, 2003 at 07:58 AM]

This is just another troll post, right?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by RookieDude
I think we discussed the following situation a year or two ago. A fellow official asked me about it last week and I told him how I would call it...see if you guys agree.

A1 leaves the ground to shoot or pass the ball. In midair, A1 decides to pass the ball to A2. B1 has legal guarding position in the path of A1. A1 passes the ball and then crashes into B1.

I told my fellow official that A1 would have commited a player control foul.

We had some discussions here concerning A1 leaving the ground, with no intention of shooting in our judgement, passing the ball to A2 and crashing into B1. If I remember correctly...some say yay, some say nay.

My thinking is A1 had "Control" of the ball when he/she left the ground...and would be under the same type of restrictions as an airborne shooter...therefore, player control on A1 even though A1 had passed the ball.

Case Book Definitions: 4.1.1 RULING: A1 is an airborne shooter when the ball is released until he/she returns to the floor.

Different Case, but could use the terminology to support statement. Such as "Airborne passer"?

Comments?

RD

RD:

Please re-read the definition of player control and team control. You will find that player control ends when a player releases the ball on a pass. Player and team control ends when the ball is released on a try, with the except of a foul BY an airborne shooter. Disregarding the airborne shooter exception, whether a player is airborne or not is not a factor in the play that you have described.

MTD, Sr.

[just another ref]

Originally posted by JugglingReferee
The way I've called this one is that it is not a PC foul, and the term used is a charge and this foul could have B shooting a 1-and-1.

Many fans/coaches think the terms charge and player control foul are interchangeable.

[cmathews]

Rookie Dude I also have made this call....however I knew right away that it wasn't correct. You are correct in that most of the time coaches won't say a word, but it does keep the defense from possibly shooting a free throw....there is a thread on here somewhere from the last couple weeks where I admitted my mistake...so sorry dude, I can't take your side even though I have been in your shoes LOL

[RookieDude]

Merry Christmas...back to work on good ol' night shifts. Day shift starts Saturday...

Originally posted by bob jenkins
This is just another troll post, right?

Looks like I didn't have any bites today.

JR probably said it best when he quoted rule 4-19-6. It talks about PC and an airborne shooter...nowhere does it say anything about a "airborne passer".

Therefore...no such animal. Hopefully, some of us "Rookies" learned something from this discussion...BTW, I really have called a PC on a player that had just passed the ball a fraction of a second before the crash. Just felt right.

RD