hitting on arms during rebound

[RookieDude]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

By rule, B1 sureashell can. The exact rule is written above a coupla times, and I ain't writing it again. Can you cite me a rule that states that B1 CAN'T legally raise his arms vertically above his head in SOME instances? If A1 is shooting a jumper over B1, and his hands follow through into the space directly overhead of B1 in front of him, is it a foul on B1 if the shooter makes contact with B1's arms that are straight up over his head? If B1 is in the act of putting his arms STRAIGHT UP when the contact with the shooter's arms occur over top of the defender's head, is your common sense also telling you that this is now a foul on the defender? Same concept, Dude.

Apples and Oranges my friend...
In your scenario A1, jumper, made or initiated contact with B1 who had his hands "straight up over his head".
No foul on B1 here.

In my scenario, B1 is the one who made or initiated contact with A1's arm, trying to knock the ball loose.
Foul on B1 here...at least in the games I call.

JR, you can probably quote the rule book backwards and forwards...but me thinks you are reading to much in to this particular rule...this one smells like a foul to me...like a rotten apple.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by RookieDude
[/B]

Apples and Oranges my friend...

JR, you can probably quote the rule book backwards and forwards...but me thinks you are reading to much in to this particular rule...this one smells like a foul to me...like a rotten apple.

[/B][/QUOTE]Not apples and oranges, Dude. Just a very plain and explicitly written rule that covers all circumstances with no exceptions that I know of- including the exceptions that you guys are trying to read into it but still don't exist in writing. Please feel free to cite a rule- any rule- that would refute anything that I have written to date.

Methinks somehow that your "methinks" unfortunately aren't enough to negate any written rule, Dude.

[Lotto]

7 ft tall A1 standing next to 5 ft tall B1. A1 is bent slightly so that his head is directly above B1's head. B1 deliberately and viciously punches A1 in the face. B1's arm (and fist) never leave the vertical space above his body.

Foul or no foul? On whom?

[Adam]

Originally posted by Lotto
7 ft tall A1 standing next to 5 ft tall B1. A1 is bent slightly so that his head is directly above B1's head. B1 deliberately and viciously punches A1 in the face. B1's arm (and fist) never leave the vertical space above his body.

Foul or no foul? On whom?

For crying out loud, Lotto. This is a fight and the verticality isn't even relevant.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Lotto
7 ft tall A1 standing next to 5 ft tall B1. A1 is bent slightly so that his head is directly above B1's head. B1 deliberately and viciously punches A1 in the face. B1's arm (and fist) never leave the vertical space above his body.

Foul or no foul? On whom?

This scenario has absolutely nothing to do with what's being discussed. Deliberately and viciously punching an opponent is always a foul. It doesn't have anything to do with verticality.

[Adam]

Kelvin,
No one is saying it's a foul to violate the air space above another player. Only that contact in someone's air space is the responsibility of the player who does not own that particular air space.
If A1 is shooting a jump shot and his arms are in B2's air space, any contact would be the responsibility of A1, and B2 cannot be penalized for it. Per rule.
The rule was not written to allow B2 to wave his arms sans contact. That's already allowed. It was written to allow B2 to make contact in his own air space without penalty.
There is no provision that states his arms must already be there. Therefore, it looks to me that he may actually initiate the contact as long the contact is made in his own air space.

[Lotto]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

This scenario has absolutely nothing to do with what's being discussed. Deliberately and viciously punching an opponent is always a foul. It doesn't have anything to do with verticality.

My point exactly. My reading of some of the opinions expressed above was that any contact that occurs in the vertical space above B1 cannot result in a foul called on B1. This example was intended to show that that is not the case.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Lotto

My point exactly. My reading of some of the opinions expressed above was that any contact that occurs in the vertical space above B1 cannot result in a foul called on B1. This example was intended to show that that is not the case.

Interesting point. Not relevant at all to the discussion, I don't think, but an interesting point. How about "any contact other than deliberate, flagrant or unsporting contact that occurs in B1's vertical space can never result in a foul being called on B1". Can you argue that now, and back your argument up with a rules citation?

[TimTaylor]

I think maybe we're missing a key element here.....


4-12-5: Team control does not exist during a jump ball or the touching of a rebound, but is re-established when a player secures control.

Since there is no longer team control once the ball leaves the shooter's hands on a try or tap for goal (4-12-3-a), it follows that all players on the floor are, at that point, of equal standing - there is no offense or defense, just like with a jump ball to start the game.

This being the case, none of the rules references citing verticality of the defender, etc. would apply, since there is by specific rule definition no offensive or defensive team status.

Personally I treat it like I would a jump ball situation at the beginning of the game. IHMO, the key is the principle of advantage/disadvantaqe - two or more players going for the ball at the same time & contact is incidental - no call, play on. But if one player gets to it first & an opponent then reaches in or up & whacks him on the arm it creates a definite disadvantage - call the foul.

Just my $.02........

[Kelvin green]

Originally posted by Snaqwells
Kelvin,
No one is saying it's a foul to violate the air space above another player. Only that contact in someone's air space is the responsibility of the player who does not own that particular air space.
If A1 is shooting a jump shot and his arms are in B2's air space, any contact would be the responsibility of A1, and B2 cannot be penalized for it. Per rule.
The rule was not written to allow B2 to wave his arms sans contact. That's already allowed. It was written to allow B2 to make contact in his own air space without penalty.
There is no provision that states his arms must already be there. Therefore, it looks to me that he may actually initiate the contact as long the contact is made in his own air space.

Disagree. The only legal move here is extending his arms vertically by rule. Any other movement would probably be illegal. You have to remember that when hands are vertical it does not take much movement to move out side vertical area to front or side. If this player swats at the ball it will be more likely a foul than not (pretty hard to swat at balland keep it in the vertical plane) The arm movements would have to be normal guarding movement inside the vertical plane.

Now if we want to get serios about the semantics. Verticiality only applies to legal guarding position. So if we take this further. On a rebound who is guarding who? Ball is loose. Did B who was involved in this rebound face A? Was he in his path? If the answer is no then using all the definitions verticality doesnt even apply.

Would be apply the verticiality rule in that literal of a sense?

[ysong]

I believe the rule implies that "verticality" applies to all players at all time, regardless they are defenders or not.

Is that right?

Thanks.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by TimTaylor
I think maybe we're missing a key element here.....


4-12-5: Team control does not exist during a jump ball or the touching of a rebound, but is re-established when a player secures control.

Since there is no longer team control once the ball leaves the shooter's hands on a try or tap for goal (4-12-3-a), it follows that all players on the floor are, at that point, of equal standing - there is no offense or defense, just like with a jump ball to start the game.

This being the case, none of the rules references citing verticality of the defender, etc. would apply, since there is by specific rule definition no offensive or defensive team status.

Rule 10-6-1 (already cited above) says "Extending the arms fully or partially OTHER THAN VERTICALLY so that freedom of movement of an opponent is hindered when contact with the arms occurs is NOT legal. These positions are employed when REBOUNDING, screening or in various aspects pf post play".

Iow, this rule specifically says that the concept of verticality DOES apply to rebounding.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Kelvin green
[/B]

Now if we want to get serios about the semantics. Verticiality only applies to legal guarding position.

[/B][/QUOTE]Again, read the cite from Rule 10-6-1 above. That rule says something differently from what you're saying, Kelvin.It's telling you that verticality does apply to rebounders, and that extending the arms vertically when contact occurs is a legal act.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Kelvin green
[/B]

The only legal move here is extending his arms vertically by rule. Any other movement would probably be illegal. You have to remember that when hands are vertical it does not take much movement to move out side vertical area to front or side. If this player swats at the ball it will be more likely a foul than not (pretty hard to swat at balland keep it in the vertical plane) The arm movements would have to be normal guarding movement inside the vertical plane.


[/B][/QUOTE]I certainly agree with you that any other movement than vertically could be illegal. The call is judgement all the way anyway. If you think that the arms are straight up, probably not a foul on the defender. If they aren't completely straight up, or if they move around, possibly could be foul on the defender. Also a no-call a lot of times too. Each case is different and unique, and is usually called that way.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Lotto
My point exactly. My reading of some of the opinions expressed above was that any contact that occurs in the vertical space above B1 cannot result in a foul called on B1.

No one else indicated any such thing.