The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 19, 2004, 09:08pm
oc oc is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 321
A1 is driving the lane and jumps toward the hoop. B1 comes into block the path, after A1 is airborn (legal guarding position is not set). A1 with the ball in their right hand pushes B1 with their left arm/elbow. If A1 had kept their arm to themself it would have been a blocking foul on B1. What's the call?

Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 19, 2004, 10:07pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,612
PC foul.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 19, 2004, 10:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,856
A1 pushed B1 with their arm/elbow before B1 could get out of the way to avoid the block.
PC foul on A1.
__________________
Dan Ivey
Tri-City Sports Officials Asso. (TCSOA)
Member since 1989
Richland, WA
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 19, 2004, 10:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Lawton, OK
Posts: 505
OK question. Is a PC counted toward team fouls and bonus?
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 19, 2004, 10:45pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,856
Sure.
But B1 would not shoot a FT for the PC foul.
__________________
Dan Ivey
Tri-City Sports Officials Asso. (TCSOA)
Member since 1989
Richland, WA
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 19, 2004, 10:53pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Lawton, OK
Posts: 505
Quote:
Originally posted by RookieDude
Sure.
But B1 would not shoot a FT for the PC foul.
So, if team A had 6 team fouls and A1 comits a PC, team B would be shooting a 1 and 1. Yes?
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 19, 2004, 11:17pm
oc oc is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 321
Quote:
Originally posted by TravelinMan
Quote:
Originally posted by RookieDude
Sure.
But B1 would not shoot a FT for the PC foul.
So, if team A had 6 team fouls and A1 comits a PC, team B would be shooting a 1 and 1. Yes?
No
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 20, 2004, 12:13am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,856
Even though it is the 7th team foul for Team A...B1 would not shoot a FT because the 7th foul was a PC foul.

Sooooo, you could have 7 team fouls on the board with no FT's being shot.
Is that what you are asking TravelinMan?
__________________
Dan Ivey
Tri-City Sports Officials Asso. (TCSOA)
Member since 1989
Richland, WA
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 20, 2004, 01:04am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
You never shoot PC.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 20, 2004, 01:05am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
Unless you deem it "intentional".
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 20, 2004, 07:24am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 17,267
Quote:
Originally posted by rainmaker
Unless you deem it "intentional".
And then it's not, by definition, PC.

Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Sun May 23, 2004, 07:55pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Lawton, OK
Posts: 505
Quote:
Originally posted by RookieDude
Even though it is the 7th team foul for Team A...B1 would not shoot a FT because the 7th foul was a PC foul.

Sooooo, you could have 7 team fouls on the board with no FT's being shot.
Is that what you are asking TravelinMan?
Yes, just wanted to clarify for members listening in.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Sun May 23, 2004, 11:04pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Jerry City, Ohio
Posts: 394
Blocking foul by B. Contact occurred because B was 1)not entitled to the spot on the floor and 2)did not establish legal guarding position.

Remember, when A returns to the floor his arms come with him. His arms even go with him as he continues in the air toward the basket. When the contact occurred it is not A who initiated it but B did, therefore B's foul.

Don't complicate a textbook block (as you described) by over-analyzing it.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Sun May 23, 2004, 11:18pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,856
Quote:
Originally posted by Daryl H. Long
Blocking foul by B. Contact occurred because B was 1)not entitled to the spot on the floor and 2)did not establish legal guarding position.

Remember, when A returns to the floor his arms come with him. His arms even go with him as he continues in the air toward the basket. When the contact occurred it is not A who initiated it but B did, therefore B's foul.

Don't complicate a textbook block (as you described) by over-analyzing it.
Soooo...if A's arms "come down with him" swinging, punching, pushing, etc. it's OK?
__________________
Dan Ivey
Tri-City Sports Officials Asso. (TCSOA)
Member since 1989
Richland, WA
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 24, 2004, 12:49am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Jerry City, Ohio
Posts: 394
If I'm not mistaken, the thread established that A's contact was neither flagrant nor intentional. There was no swinging, there was no punching, nor did A push B intentionally. Once A is airborne he cannot alter his momentum nor change where he will land. B did not get legal guarding position and by defintion he is responsible for causing illegal contact. See Point of Emphasis on page 71 of Rule book. It gives criteria for determining block/charge (subheading E).
Point 1. Addresses two factors.
a.Who was at the spot first? ANS. A
b.Was the guard FACING the player with the ball
with two feet on the playing court? ( this is
the same as asking did the guard have legal
Guarding position?) ANS. NO

Therefore B initated the contact. Reading further on page 71 in Point 4. Contact initiated by the defense (on or off the ball) that involves lower body, non-vertical contact and defending a perimeter player or AN AIRBORNE PLAYER, should be "BLOCK."

In my opinion, the mere fact that while airborne A's arm/elbow contacted B that was incidental therefore ignored. Rule 10.6.1 makes it possible for either player to have arms is a position to afford him protection or to absorb the force of contact. Charge B with Blocking foul and shoot appropriate free throws.

But. Let's assume for the sake of argument that A could try for goal (concentrating on judging proper distance/arc needed to be sucessful) with his right hand and at the same time with his left hand punch or swing at a defender occupying an illegal space on the floor. (This is hard for me to believe. In 25 years of officiating and 18 years of evaluating Division 1 officials have I ever seen this happen to be called)

B is still guilty of a block. Nothing A does can exonerate B if he was responsible for the contact. B is guilty of a personal foul. Charge A with a flagrant personal foul and eject. This is a double foul. No free throws, AP throw in.

So, given the play as described by OC in original post and even given the scenario by RookieDude, by definition A still is not charged with a player control foul in either case.

[Edited by Daryl H. Long on May 24th, 2004 at 01:54 AM]
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:04am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1