Pick and Roll Follow Up, Posting Up

[ryan330i]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Big difference. You're saying that a little butt bump that puts an opponent back on his heels isn't a foul. I'm saying that it is, but it may or may not be called, dependant on whether the official thought that it gave the bumper an advantage. [/B]

OK, lets draw one more distinction to perhaps bridge the gap. Consider boxing out the shooter after a shot when he is in a very upright position vs. boxing out a PF who is already positioning himself in a low stance to get the rebound. Do you consider those cases different at all, from a referee standpoint when observing the player being put on their heels and having to put a foot back (losing position)?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ryan330i
[/B]

OK, lets draw one more distinction to perhaps bridge the gap. Consider boxing out the shooter after a shot when he is in a very upright position vs. boxing out a PF who is already positioning himself in a low stance to get the rebound. Do you consider those cases different at all, from a referee standpoint when observing the player being put on their heels and having to put a foot back (losing position)?


[/B][/QUOTE]No difference at all from a referee's standpoint. Both players are entitled to their spot on the floor. You are also entitled to your normal spot, and the air above it. Neither you or your opponent can legally move the other from their spot once it's been established. It's that simple.

[ryan330i]

Alright, then it's a foul, but I think you are being obtuse about it.

Boxing out does and should upset the positioning of the player without being a foul. That's the whole point. You can't just stand between someone and the basket without putting your body on them and expect that to be effective.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by ryan330i
Boxing out does and should upset the positioning of the player without being a foul.

"Upsetting the positioning of the opponent" is the definition of the word "foul". Every player is entitled to any spot on the floor as long as he or she gets there legally first. Once that person you are boxing out has position, you can't legally move him. When boxing out is legal, it means a team working together to keep the opponents from legally reaching certain spots in the first place. When a coach hollers "Box out!!" and he means "push them out of the way", he's telling you to do something illegal. Period.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ryan330i

Boxing out does and should upset the positioning of the player without being a foul. That's the whole point. You can't just stand between someone and the basket without putting your body on them and expect that to be effective.

What Rainmaker said. If you get away with it, great. if you get called, now you know why.

[Rickref]

Originally posted by ryan330i
Alright, then it's a foul, but I think you are being obtuse about it.

Boxing out does and should upset the positioning of the player without being a foul. That's the whole point. You can't just stand between someone and the basket without putting your body on them and expect that to be effective.

Anytime a player is displaced from their position you have a foul. If a player sticks their butt into someone and backs them up it should be called.

[ryan330i]

The only time I see this called is when I see position lost, and that only occurs when 1) the guy flops 2)the guys is pushed well and visibly out of position by a sustained backward motion. Easy call. Not disupting it.


My earlier points are very clear that a proper box-out does displace/upset/move the player, but only enough to put him on his heels and make him adjust feeting and deal with leverage I have.

This is still a confusion of descriptions. No matter what anyone says about this being a foul, what I am trying to describe is not a foul and the simple fact remains that it is not called a foul in almost 100% of the thousands of refereed games I've either participated in or witnessed. Rulebook definitions won't help you here, because it sounds like you could call every box-out a foul and see how long your career as a referee lasts then.


So we are left with 1 of 2 conclusions:

1) Through a statistical "perfect storm", every game you have refereed or witnessed has been significantly different than the thousands I've played or watched.

2) we are not talking the same language, despite my best efforts at clarity.



Which is more likely?

[Rickref]

Originally posted by ryan330i
The only time I see this called is when I see position lost, and that only occurs when 1) the guy flops 2)the guys is pushed well and visibly out of position by a sustained backward motion. Easy call. Not disupting it.


My earlier points are very clear that a proper box-out does displace/upset/move the player, but only enough to put him on his heels and make him adjust feeting and deal with leverage I have.

This is still a confusion of descriptions. No matter what anyone says about this being a foul, what I am trying to describe is not a foul and the simple fact remains that it is not called a foul in almost 100% of the thousands of refereed games I've either participated in or witnessed. Rulebook definitions won't help you here, because it sounds like you could call every box-out a foul and see how long your career as a referee lasts then.


So we are left with 1 of 2 conclusions:

1) Through a statistical "perfect storm", every game you have refereed or witnessed has been significantly different than the thousands I've played or watched.

2) we are not talking the same language, despite my best efforts at clarity.



Which is more likely?

I understand what your talking about. The verbage makes it sound different than what it is. Bascially what your describing is more; there is slight or no contact, no displacement so no foul, but it effectively takes away the ability of the player being boxed out to gather themselves to out jump the rebounder. Yes the player being boxed out is being placed at a disadvantage but is only because of the legal positioning of the player boxing out. I have no problem with this, no foul, good hard work on the kids part.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ryan330i


This is still a confusion of descriptions. No matter what anyone says about this being a foul, what I am trying to describe is not a foul and the simple fact remains that it is not called a foul in almost 100% of the thousands of refereed games I've either participated in or witnessed. Rulebook definitions won't help you here, because it sounds like you could call every box-out a foul and see how long your career as a referee lasts then.


So we are left with 1 of 2 conclusions:

1) Through a statistical "perfect storm", every game you have refereed or witnessed has been significantly different than the thousands I've played or watched.

See how long my career lasts? It's lasted for 45 freaking years so far. For thousands and thousands of games. At all levels. That includes football too. I've told you why it's a foul. Personally, I really don't give a damn whether you believe me or not. If you think that your playing and watching games has made you such a great rules expert, then why are you wasting your time asking questions here anyway? You don't need us. You obviously already know everything there is to know about the rules. If you don't think it's a foul, great. Don't call it in your driveway games. And also don't bother to come here and waste our time anymore either. It's hardly worth it if you already have all the answers.

[ryan330i]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

[/B]I've told you why it's a foul. Personally, I really don't give a damn whether you believe me or not. If you think that your playing and watching games has made you such a great rules expert... [/B]

I see you've chosen option #1, that we are discussing the same mechanics and are both 100% sure that rules and statistical evidence supports our opposite viewpoints.


There was an option #2...

Why don't I help you here. I'll admit my description of the dynamics and mechanics involved was not as clear as neccessary for us to agree on what we both know is 100% correct.

I'll admit that the "backing-up" of a player is a foul, and you admit that a good block out will put two players in contact with some minor jostling of position within their shared space ...without the guying being blocking losing his position.

I didn't post to this thread asking any question, only offering my opinion of the dynamics of a block out. It's an open forum to those who aren't referees, and I reserve my right to engage you in any discussion I feel qualified to render an opinion on (my .02)

This horse is dead.

- Ryan
Indiana boy

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ryan330i
[/B]

I didn't post to this thread asking any question, only offering my opinion of the dynamics of a block out. It's an open forum to those who aren't referees, and I reserve my right to engage you in any discussion I feel qualified to render an opinion on (my .02)

- Ryan
Indiana boy


[/B][/QUOTE]And my opinion is that you aren't qualified to make comments on rules. You don't know the rules. That's my .02.

- JR
Referee boy

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by ryan330i

I see you've chosen option #1, that we are discussing the same mechanics and are both 100% sure that rules and statistical evidence supports our opposite viewpoints.


There was an option #2...

Why don't I help you here. I'll admit my description of the dynamics and mechanics involved was not as clear as neccessary for us to agree on what we both know is 100% correct.

[/B]

Ryan, we all know what you're talking about. You're simply wrong. If a box out moves, displaces, or even knocks the opponent off balance, a foul has been committed. By definition, the person boxing out didn't get to that spot first since he knocked the opponent out of it. Does it ofen go uncalled? Yes. Usually because it is determined that in spite of the contact, the rebound still ended up in the same hands as if the contact had never occured. However, in some cases, this will not be true. The foul must then be called.

[ryan330i]

Originally posted by Camron Rust

Ryan, we all know what you're talking about. You're simply wrong...

...a foul has been committed...

...Does it ofen go uncalled? Yes.

Usually because it is determined that in spite of the contact, the rebound still ended up in the same hands as if the contact had never occured. However, in some cases, this will not be true. The foul must then be called.

I wondered if anyone would forward this opinion.

Aren't you breaking some sort of referee code by saying a foul is not regularly enforced?

I do give up though. Either we are talking about the same thing, or we are talking about a situation where the foul in the textbook that isn't often enforced. I can live with either.

[Adam]

QUOTE]Originally posted by ryan330i

Boxing out does and should upset the positioning of the player without being a foul. That's the whole point. You can't just stand between someone and the basket without putting your body on them and expect that to be effective.

[/QUOTE]

Ryan,
The problem with this post is basic logic. If B1 is sticking his *** out of his vertical plane and upsets A1's balance, it's a foul by definition. Boxing out that involves pushing and displacement, with intent, is lazy. The player boxing out should be able to do so without violating the rules, without "pushing" or "knocking off balance." Essentially, it's the same as setting a legal screen.
It seems to me this is a lot like holding in football. In spite of how often we think it gets called, it is simply not a good block if the blocker holds.

You probably never see this called for two reasons. First, I don't think it really happens that often at any significant level of ball. Players are too coordinated, and they're not going to get knocked off balance (or "on their heels") by slight contact that they are expecting. If it does happen, the chances of a real rebounding advantage happening at the same time are minimal given the odds of the ball going to that spot.

Bottom line, it's just not true that a good box out knocks the boxed player on his heels. No matter how many games you've watched.

[TigerBball]

As a simple coach reading this post, I would come to the conclusion that if my guy is on the outside and is getting boxed out and does not try to maintain his spot, thus getting knocked backwards, I should expect a foul to be called on the other team.

But, if my guy stay low, lean back, and hold his position, no foul would be called.

So I guess I should start telling my guys to let themselves be pushed backwards in order to get a foul called on them.

what is there to be gained by trying to hold your spot.

Ryan, maybe because we are from Indiana, we see thing different than the rest, but if refs called a box out the way this thread says they should, we would be shooting 100 FT's a game.

OK Senior members, blast away at me, I know you will, but I think the rules and the reality on this one are polar opposites.