As a matter of fact, justacoach, yes, on the Jesuit part. I went to Georgetown University.

We officials appreciate those coaches who try to understand the finer points of the rules and teach their players to play a better game.

1 -- probably a PC foul (could be intentional or flagrant) (depends on the meaning of "elbows")

2 & 3 -- probably intentional or flagrant (depends on the meaning of "tackles")

4 -- might be okay depending on the type of attempt A had and whether A1 could be injured now that the ball is back at B's end of the court.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bob jenkins
[B]1 -- probably a PC foul (could be intentional or flagrant) (depends on the meaning of "elbows")

As A1 raises ball above head, A1's elbow smacks B1 in the chops. My angle hides this contact, but it must have occured. I see B1 dislodged, fall to ground, then rise bloodied and in tears.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bob jenkins
[B]2 & 3 -- probably intentional or flagrant (depends on the meaning of "tackles")

A2 leaps on the back of B2, A2 wraps arms around B2's arms (stripping ball)and both B2 and A2 fall to the gound.

B obtains possession from rebound off backboard. A2 is well beyond the arc and to the side opposite play.

If A1 is injured and there is not a fast break for his team. I'm stopping the clock before they run any kind of offense. Not sure why they'd make A run their offense and take a shot before stopping the clock.

As for the tackle, as you describe it. I've at least got an intentional (probably a flagrant), but I'd have to see it.

On second thought. I might be able to justify 15 yards for roughing the dribbler.

As for the tackle, as you describe it. I've at least got an intentional (probably a flagrant), but I'd have to see it.

Further about the tackle, the same defensive player makes two such moves against the same offesive player within the first 4 minutes of the game.

I'd also be curious about any thoughts on the elbow. That occurred between the two tackles and involved post players.

If the first one had been called an intentional, the 2nd one may not have happened. If I called the first one an intentional, and he proceeded to do it again, he's done. Flagrant Personal.

As for the elbow, it reads like a pc, but I'd really have to see it to say for sure.

As for the elbow, it reads like a pc, but I'd really have to see it to say for sure. [/B][/QUOTE]

That's the problem. No clear view of the contact. Assume your angle prevents you from actually seeing the elbow contact B1' chops. You see A1 raise the ball to shoot, while B1 is in LGP. Before A1 shoots, you see B1 displaced and fall as shot occurs. B1 then rises bloodied and in tears. A1's shot missed, B1 attempts to block second attempt then leaves court after second attempt succeeds.

M:Goal counts.

You can't call a foul you didn't see. If you don't see the contact, you don't know definitively how B1 got displaced and bloodied. Displacement often comes from a flop. As for the blood, it could have already happened and you didn't see it.
Bottom line, if you can't see the contact, you shouldn't call the foul.

Adam