block, then a block?

[lrpalmer3]

Case:

A1 drives to the basket and releases one of those new school tear-drop high-arching layups when B1 comes from nowhere and blocks it into the backcourt. A1 has landed when B1 crashes down into him, but not violently. In fact, only you and A1's coach even see the contact because everyone else is gazing at the ball which is long gone.

A lot of refs no-call this play (including me) because the block was so clean. Some of you refs out there that also no-call it, what do you tell the coach of A1?

[dhodges007]

Originally posted by lrpalmer3
Case:

A1 drives to the basket and releases one of those new school tear-drop high-arching layups when B1 comes from nowhere and blocks it into the backcourt. A1 has landed when B1 crashes down into him, but not violently. In fact, only you and A1's coach even see the contact because everyone else is gazing at the ball which is long gone.

A lot of refs no-call this play (including me) because the block was so clean. Some of you refs out there that also no-call it, what do you tell the coach of A1?

Nothing. If the coach asked me a question about it then I would tell him or her that the contact had no effect on the play.

Now I am assuming that in this play by A1 and B1 it wasn't a crash and that B2 gained possesion of the ball. If A2 gained possesion then I would remind the coach that it was still their ball...

[Jimgolf]

I don't understand how you can "crash" into someone non-violently. If I see incidental contact, no call. If I see "crashing", we're going to the line.

[davidw]

I'm assuming what you mean by 'crashes down into him but not violently' you mean A1 was not displaced or placed in a disadvantaged position, i.e. not able to participate in subsequent action such as an opportunity to retrieve the blocked shot. If A1 is not put in such a position, then yes, I no call this and judge it to be incidental contact and if the coach asks, that's all I say: "Incidental contact, Coach".

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Jimgolf
I don't understand how you can "crash" into someone non-violently. If I see incidental contact, no call. If I see "crashing", we're going to the line.

Only if A is in the bonus, the play had A1 LANDING, then B1 crashed. This is a no-call or a foul on a non-shooter.

[lrpalmer3]

A1 is definitely displaced, but the ball is so far away that he isn't really at a disadvantage to recover it.

After thinking about it:

After A1 lands, he's just a player without the ball who runs under the location that B1 will land. You could almost call a foul on A1 for not acquiring verticality before B1 left the ground (just kidding).

This situation is much different than if A1 were shooting a simple jumpshot. In that case, you call the foul on B1 for jumping into the space on the floor occupied by A1.

For the original situation, no call - incidental contact.

[Mark Padgett]

Tell the howler monkey that there's no foul by rule. If he shrieks and howls "which rule", tell him NF rule 11.5.5.

Let him look that one up.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by lrpalmer3
A1 is definitely displaced, but the ball is so far away that he isn't really at a disadvantage to recover it.

This definition alone isn't enough to no-call, it in my opinion. I will call the contact no matter what the position of the ball, if it is a foul by definition.

I would be applying the kinds of judgment described by davidw. If there's no displacement, no significant effect on A1 physically, I'll agree with the no-call. If you're saying there's displacement, I'm on the whistle.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by rainmaker

This definition alone isn't enough to no-call, it in my opinion. I will call the contact no matter what the position of the ball, if it is a foul by definition.

You might want to rethink this.

I would be applying the kinds of judgment described by davidw. If there's no displacement, no significant effect on A1 physically, I'll agree with the no-call. If you're saying there's displacement, I'm on the whistle.

Assume A1 is "displaced" on this play - your basic 5 foot jump shot that gets swatted by the defense into the back court.

How is A1 taken out of any possible play?

What opportunity has he lost?

Why would you blow the whistle?

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

You might want to rethink this.

Assume A1 is "displaced" on this play - your basic 5 foot jump shot that gets swatted by the defense into the back court.

How is A1 taken out of any possible play?

What opportunity has he lost?

Why would you blow the whistle?

Maybe these are things that I'll need to change as I move up the levels. I tend to think if there's displacement it's a foul that needs to be called, regardless of advantage/disadvantage. Perhaps that line needs to move toward more contact, at better varsity, and when I get to clllege.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by rainmaker

Maybe these are things that I'll need to change as I move up the levels. I tend to think if there's displacement it's a foul that needs to be called, regardless of advantage/disadvantage. Perhaps that line needs to move toward more contact, at better varsity, and when I get to clllege.

Review 4-27 Art.1-3 it may help in this area.

[Edited by blindzebra on May 20th, 2004 at 02:23 AM]