call it or no call?

[xxssmen]

I know that all officials have there own philosophy on certain calls, here is one that have been taught to me by a veteran official, player A dribble pass player B.
Player B does a wrap around on player A to knock the ball from behind and do so, but no contact is made from my view.
Even though there is no contact this veteran officials say that its chicken **** d-fense and that 90% of the official will never see contact and we should blow the whistle.
I know I have let alot of those play go because I see no contact although the player always complain of getting hit when they do the wrap around.
I always thought that you can't call what you can't see.
Is this a good philosophy?

[tomegun]

Uh, be careful about any information that official gives you in the future.

[zebracz]

HEY, XX__

No, I've had the exact same question this whole year! Why on earth, would you call a foul on a guy that's "already beat,"or "already lost the battle--his guy has gone to the hole, about to score or dish off for that 'mean' dunk?" Why? Yeah, he's playing lazy 'D,' but who cares? So, that's happened while I've played and w/ my partner when I've reff'd. I've debated w/ fellow p's about that call. Some say they call it every time. I strongly disagree, too, XX.

Let me know what else you think 'bout it...

gl

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by xxssmen

I always thought that you can't call what you can't see.
Is this a good philosophy?

Many years ago(about 40), they actually used to teach that you should automatically call a foul on the "reach-in from behind", using the same rationale as the veterano told you. They quit using, and teaching, that philosophy for the same reasons that you posted. It was wrong.

[mplagrow]

'Anything from behind is a foul.' *sigh*

This is a coaching philosophy designed to warn their players to get good defensive position. It is not a rule. The same principle applies to a perfectly clean block (or rebound) from behind where everyone in the gym wants, you guessed it, OVER THE BACK.

[PA Official]

Newcomer...had to repyly to this one.

If there is no contact, there is no foul.

[Jeremy Hohn]

Originally posted by zebracz
HEY, XX__

No, I've had the exact same question this whole year! Why on earth, would you call a foul on a guy that's "already beat,"or "already lost the battle--his guy has gone to the hole, about to score or dish off for that 'mean' dunk?" Why? Yeah, he's playing lazy 'D,' but who cares? So, that's happened while I've played and w/ my partner when I've reff'd. I've debated w/ fellow p's about that call. Some say they call it every time. I strongly disagree, too, XX.

Let me know what else you think 'bout it...

gl

This is good game management. If we work our good angles at "C" position and "T" we won't have to worry about guessing unless you are blocked out. Keep your eyes on your defender at all times, and pick up the defense early and often. Slight changes in angle can make all the difference...

Weigh the advantage/disadvantage aspect of the play, and wether or not the player does indeed suffer arm/body contact AND if he/she loses the ball. Quite often this action is one of a desperate/beaten defender and the offense is going toward the basket with a numerical advantage and we take that away in this instance by blowing a foul...

[dhodges007]

Originally posted by PA Official
Newcomer...had to repyly to this one.

If there is no contact, there is no foul.

Welcome!!

[EMM]

How about this one:

Player A shoots and Player B goes to block the shot. The whole gym hears a slap of the guys forearm, but the ref says he doesnt see it, so he doesnt call the foul. He says he needs to see it not hear it. The ball clearly changes direction and never reaches the backboard and goes out of bounds. Ref calls the ball out on Player A the shooter. I, not being a ref but being a coach, would think that it is rather obvious that the defensive player hit either the arm or the ball which should have resulted in a foul on Player B or it being out of bounds on Player B.

However, the response from the ref is that he didnt "see the contact" of either the ball or the arm.

What is the right call here?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by EMM
Player A shoots and Player B goes to block the shot. The whole gym hears a slap of the guys forearm, but the ref says he doesnt see it, so he doesnt call the foul. He says he needs to see it not hear it. The ball clearly changes direction and never reaches the backboard and goes out of bounds. Ref calls the ball out on Player A the shooter. I, not being a ref but being a coach, would think that it is rather obvious that the defensive player hit either the arm or the ball which should have resulted in a foul on Player B or it being out of bounds on Player B.

However, the response from the ref is that he didnt "see the contact" of either the ball or the arm.

What is the right call here?

The right call is the call that the official made. It isn't that obvious, either. The defender can legally hit the shooter's hand from the side, thus causing the ball to go out of bounds at an angle. If the ball last touched the shooter's hand, even though the defender hit that hand, then the shooter was the last player to touch the ball in bounds, and the defense then gets the ball, by rule.

On any call, an official is not supposed to guess. If you don't actually see where the slap landed, then all you have is just a guess as to whether a foul occurred or not. The easy way out, for an official, is to just call the foul. That keeps the coach and fans happy, even though they don't know the rule. Good officials don't worry about this, though. They wanna get the call right. And the right call isn't gonna be made by guessing.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Mar 6th, 2004 at 06:38 AM]