Legal and Illegal use of elbows

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

I, too, could have posted a cursory "you're wrong", and decreased my response time. Instead, I took the high road and decided to inform and educate the masses on the proper application of this rule. And the thanks that I get for doing so is some churl essentially saying "Nanny, Nanny, Boo Boo" to me. Well, some day you will recognize my brilliance and give me my proper due!

Hey, that "MTD Sr. post reply" course that I took is actually taking hold, I see.

3 minutes to type your original response!!!

I guess everything slows down with age.

[aucella]

Da I dont know but I did leave the most important point I called a common foul on B1 non shooting before the T ( I should'nt type that early in the morning)And for information purposes you can have a T on a live ball but 99% of the time it's non contact and on a dead ball

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Hmmm, ball's live. . . illegal contact. . . Could you have something other than a T here?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Eric Huechteman

Rule 4-44-5: "The offensive player whether on the floor or airborne, may not "clear out" or cause contact within the defender's vertical plane which is a foul."

Rule 4-44-6: "The defender may not "belly up" or use the lower part of the body or arms to cause contact outside his/her vertical plane which is a foul."

The offensive player may not use his elbows to "clear out," but the defensive player may not "belly up" either. It is not good defense, but, rather, poor officiating, if a player can "cause contact outside of his/her vertical plane" without being called for a foul. I see this all the time in HS games: A1 gets trapped and is slowly pushed off balance. Is a foul called? NO, that's just good defense. Instead, A1 is called for traveling.

Rule 4-23-3b: "The guard may move laterally or obliquely to maintain position, provided it is not toward the opponent when contact occurs."

Is it possible to contact a stationary opponent without moving toward him?

Eric:

When "A1 is trapped and is slowly pushed off balance," if there is contact between a defender and A1 while A1 is in the off balance position, the foul is charged to the defender. If A1 regains his/her balance without making contact with the defender there is no foul. But, if there is contact between A1 and the defender when A1 attempts to return to a more upright position, the foul is charged to the defender.

Please see my postings in the Legal Guarding Position Thread.

[Damian]

Had a couple of situations this past weekend.

Player A1 if facing defender and swings ball followed elbow at head of defender and hits him with elbow. Partner calls an immediate T. I had to think about it but agreed with his call.

Backcourt. Two defenders both in player with ball. They are very agressive, but do not reach or initiate contact. After sevearl seconds of this, offensive player gets frustrated and starts swinging elbows to gain some room. I call exessive swinging and award ball to defense. Got a lot of help from the fans who were yelling to get the defense off of the player.

I understand the T for coming down with rebound swinging and hitting opponents head. A head shot is a head shot.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

I, too, could have posted a cursory "you're wrong", and decreased my response time. Instead, I took the high road and decided to inform and educate the masses on the proper application of this rule. And the thanks that I get for doing so is some churl essentially saying "Nanny, Nanny, Boo Boo" to me. Well, some day you will recognize my brilliance and give me my proper due!

Hey, that "MTD Sr. post reply" course that I took is actually taking hold, I see.

Very seldom do I post short one or two word replys. If anything I would thing that I am noted for my lengthy posts with plenty of quotes from rules (NFHS, NCAA, FIBA, and NBA/WNBA) and casebook plays.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Damian
Had a couple of situations this past weekend.

Player A1 if facing defender and swings ball followed elbow at head of defender and hits him with elbow. Partner calls an immediate T. I had to think about it but agreed with his call.

Backcourt. Two defenders both in player with ball. They are very agressive, but do not reach or initiate contact. After sevearl seconds of this, offensive player gets frustrated and starts swinging elbows to gain some room. I call exessive swinging and award ball to defense. Got a lot of help from the fans who were yelling to get the defense off of the player.

I understand the T for coming down with rebound swinging and hitting opponents head. A head shot is a head shot.

Please explain to me how you can charge A1 with a technical foul for a live ball contact foul. By definitiona (NFHS and NCAA) a live ball contact foul is a personal foul. A personal foul is either a common foul, a foul committed against a player in the act of shooting, intentional, or flagrant.

In your play you had a personal foul. The decision your partnera had to make was: Was A1 fouls a common foul (player control foul), intentional foul, or a flagrant foul.

MTD, Sr.

[Damian]

I didn't make that call, but I would guess that my partner determined that the action was an unsportsmanlike act instead of a flagrant foul. Similar to taunting during a live ball.

It may have not been the correct interpretation of the rules, but the difference is that the person stayed in the game and the rest of the tournament.

This tournament was 17U with the best teams in the country and about 75-100 college coaches in attendance. Not that this changes the rules, but that is the way it was called.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Damian
I didn't make that call, but I would guess that my partner determined that the action was an unsportsmanlike act instead of a flagrant foul. Similar to taunting during a live ball.

It may have not been the correct interpretation of the rules, but the difference is that the person stayed in the game and the rest of the tournament.

This tournament was 17U with the best teams in the country and about 75-100 college coaches in attendance. Not that this changes the rules, but that is the way it was called.

A1 swinging his elbows may well have been unsportsmanlike, but it was definitely not an act of taunting, the only factor that governs this play is that A1 made illegal contact with B1 while the ball was live, and that makes it a personal foul. Your partner then has to make a judgement as to whether it is a common foul, an intentional foul, or a flagrant foul.

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

A1 swinging his elbows may well have been unsportsmanlike, but it was definitely not an act of taunting, the only factor that governs this play is that A1 made illegal contact with B1 while the ball was live, and that makes it a personal foul. Your partner then has to make a judgement as to whether it is a common foul, an intentional foul, or a flagrant foul.

I beg to differ. The act of swinging the elbows at the player's head precedes the contact. I would judge the act as unsportsmanlike and call a T. The contact was just the icing on the cake. The unsportsmanlike part of the player technical rule only lists some examples and clearly says "but is not limited to". So, it is up to the official to determine what other things are unsportsmanlike.

You could call it fighting...which is clearly a T according to rule 10-3-10. It can be fighting because rule 4-18 clearly states that fighing can happen when the ball is live or dead and is based on the attempt to strike and does not depend on whether contact is made or not.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Camron Rust

I beg to differ. The act of swinging the elbows at the player's head precedes the contact. I would judge the act as unsportsmanlike and call a T. The contact was just the icing on the cake. The unsportsmanlike part of the player technical rule only lists some examples and clearly says "but is not limited to". So, it is up to the official to determine what other things are unsportsmanlike.

You could call it fighting...which is clearly a T according to rule 10-3-10. It can be fighting because rule 4-18 clearly states that fighing can happen when the ball is live or dead and is based on the attempt to strike and does not depend on whether contact is made or not.

Camron, you have forgotten one very important thing, see the whole play. I agree with you that one could possible see the contact as fighting but in this case this is highly unlikely. One should not go looking for things that aren't there. KISS is the best way to handle this play. This is a personal foul and only one of three types occured: common, intentional, or flagrant. Do not apply rules that do not apply to the play.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
[/B]

Camron, you have forgotten one very important thing, see the whole play. I agree with you that one could possible see the contact as fighting but in this case this is highly unlikely. One should not go looking for things that aren't there. KISS is the best way to handle this play. This is a personal foul and only one of three types occured: common, intentional, or flagrant. Do not apply rules that do not apply to the play.

[/B][/QUOTE]Uh, Mark, somehow I find it strange to read this coming from you, as in the past you have advocated:
1) Calling three technical fouls for the same act- i.e. a player jumping off of a teammate, who is on his hands and knees, and then dunking the ball.
2) Giving out two technical fouls to an opponent for a single act-i.e. reaching over the OOB line and then touching the ball while it was being held for a throw-in- one T for reaching OOB on a throw-in after being warned(R9-2-11PENALTY2), and the other T for subsequently touching the ball OOB(R10-3-11).

One should not go looking for things that aren't there? KISS? Do not apply rules that do not apply to the play?

LOL!

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Apr 30th, 2004 at 01:24 PM]

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Camron, you have forgotten one very important thing, see the whole play. I agree with you that one could possible see the contact as fighting but in this case this is highly unlikely. One should not go looking for things that aren't there. KISS is the best way to handle this play. This is a personal foul and only one of three types occured: common, intentional, or flagrant. Do not apply rules that do not apply to the play.

[/B]

Uh, Mark, somehow I find it strange to read this coming from you, as in the past you have advocated:
1) Calling three technical fouls for the same act- i.e. a player jumping off of a teammate, who is on his hands and knees, and then dunking the ball.
2) Giving out two technical fouls to an opponent for a single act-i.e. reaching over the OOB line and then touching the ball while it was being held for a throw-in- one T for reaching OOB on a throw-in after being warned(R9-2-11PENALTY2), and the other T for subsequently touching the ball OOB(R10-3-11).

One should not go looking for things that aren't there? KISS? Do not apply rules that do not apply to the play?

LOL!

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Apr 30th, 2004 at 01:24 PM] [/B][/QUOTE]


First, lets address Play #2 above. I have NEVER, I repeat NEVER, advocated such a ruling. The casebook play is quite specific; it is only technical foul charged to the defender, and if the defensive team has yet to be warned for crossing the boundary plane during a throw-in, it is to also receive a warning.


Now, lets address Play #1. The play in question occured in 1991 or 1992 in the NW Ohio Regional of the Ohio State Games (similar to New York's Empire State Games). The game group was boys' 16U. Team B was getting beat by about 35 points in the second half and its coach had already received a technical foul for unsportsmanlike conduct it the first half and a player from the team had received early in the second half. The whole team was made up of a bunch of jerks. With about three or four minutes left in the game B1 intercepted a pass and started to drive in for an uncontested layup. B2 yelled to him to wait up and then proceeded to get down on his hands and knees in the free throw lane and B1 then proceeded to get up on his back and then dunked the ball. NFHS R10-S3-A7e states: "A player shall not commit an unsporting foul. This includes, but is not limited to, acts or conduct such as climibing on or lifting a teammate to secure a greater height." B1 and B2's false double foul caused the ball to be dead and then B1 proceeded to dunk a dead ball for a second technical foul. Granted this is a play that one would normally find only in a casebook or rules exam, but it is quite possible to find in such tournaments as the Ohio Games with undisciplined teams entered. I do not think that this type of play would ever occur in a real high school or college game.


So how do the two plays that we have discussed have anything to do with the play being discussed in this thread.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Now, lets address Play #1. The play in question occured in 1991 or 1992 in the NW Ohio Regional of the Ohio State Games (similar to New York's Empire State Games). The game group was boys' 16U. Team B was getting beat by about 35 points in the second half and its coach had already received a technical foul for unsportsmanlike conduct it the first half and a player from the team had received early in the second half. The whole team was made up of a bunch of jerks. With about three or four minutes left in the game B1 intercepted a pass and started to drive in for an uncontested layup. B2 yelled to him to wait up and then proceeded to get down on his hands and knees in the free throw lane and B1 then proceeded to get up on his back and then dunked the ball.

So the LOSING team did these things?!? Why not just call it?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by rainmaker

So the LOSING team did these things?!? Why not just call it?

I would have loved to have called it but in this tournament it just wasn't possible due to the time of tournament management it had. It was not the best. My partner muddled through to the end, took our money and never did the tournament again.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Eric:

When "A1 is trapped and is slowly pushed off balance," if there is contact between a defender and A1 while A1 is in the off balance position, the foul is charged to the defender. If A1 regains his/her balance without making contact with the defender there is no foul. But, if there is contact between A1 and the defender when A1 attempts to return to a more upright position, the foul is charged to the defender.

Please see my postings in the Legal Guarding Position Thread.

How is contact caused by A1 moving into B1 a foul on B1, if B1 got that spot WITHOUT contacting A1?

You conveniently ignored the following play in the other thread, so I'll repeat it.

B1 has LGP and is vertical, but loses their balance and leans back, A1 then occupies the space that B1 had before they leaned back and lost their vertical position, B1 then straightens back to vertical and pushes A1 with their chest. Based on how you'd call the other play, A1 just committed a PC foul, because they got pushed for occupying space that was once occupied by a player's vertical plane, even though that space was no longer occupied.