What would you do?

[JugglingReferee]

I had this one happen a few weeks ago...

A1 is dribbling just past the division line, on a clear path to the basket, after a turnover. He easily gets by defender B2 by sidestepping him. (B2 was flat-footed.)

B3 catches up a little bit and commits a holding foul. In fact, after he was beat by A1, and was beside A1, but had no momentum, and places his hand on A1's shoulder, trying to hold him up. At no point was B3 trying for the ball.

Of course, A1 is still dribbling, and the ball is out front. A1 is not affected by the hold, dribbles one more time, picks up his dribble, and continues to the basket for a right-handed layup.

He is then fouled by B4 coming from the left side of the court.

I called a shooting foul on B4, A1 shoots two. Team A coach starts bitching and wants a flagrant foul on B3. Later I learned he actually wanted an intentional, but was confused about what was what.


Would you have called the INT?


Now, suppose that A1 is bigger physically than B3, so there was, in my mind, no way B3 had any effect on the dribble because A1 "went right through the foul". Ie. he didn't even slow up from the hold. And suppose that there are 50 seconds left in regulation time, and A is up by 8.


Now would you have called the INT?


I didn't because I felt that at that point, which would have been 45 seconds remaining by the time that B in-bounded the ball, a guaranteed two points is better than two shots, which A1 might not make, and possession. (B would have been in "red", so to speak. Foul to stop the clock type thing.)

..Mike

[Edited by JugglingReferee on Jan 23rd, 2001 at 02:32 PM]

[mick]

Originally posted by JugglingReferee
I had this one happen a few weeks ago...

A1 is dribbling just past the division line, on a clear path to the basket, after a turnover. He easily gets by defender B2 by sidestepping him. (B2 was flat-footed.)

B3 catches up a little bit and commits a holding foul. In fact, after he was beat by A1, and was beside A1, but had no momentum, and places his hand on A1's shoulder, trying to hold him up. At no point was B3 trying for the ball.

Of course, A1 is still dribbling, and the ball is out front. A1 is not affected by the hold, dribbles one more time, picks up his dribble, and continues to the basket for a right-handed layup.

He is then fouled by B4 coming from the left side of the court.

I called a shooting foul on B4, A1 shoots two. Team A coach starts bitching and wants a flagrant foul on B3. Later I learned he actually wanted an intentional, but was confused about what was what.


Would you have called the INT?


Now, suppose that A1 is bigger physically than B3, so there was, in my mind, no way B3 had any effect on the dribble because A1 "went right through the foul". Ie. he didn't even slow up from the hold. And suppose that there are 50 seconds left in regulation time, and A is up by 8.


Now would you have called the INT?


I didn't because I felt that at that point, which would have been 45 seconds remaining by the time that B in-bounded the ball, a guaranteed two points is better than two shots, which A1 might not make, and possession. (B would have been in "red", so to speak. Foul to stop the clock type thing.)

..Mike

[Edited by JugglingReferee on Jan 23rd, 2001 at 02:32 PM]

Mike.
I think you made very good Judgement in waiting for A1 to finish before you whistled.
Whe you finally did whistle, depending on the action, and assuming this all occurred in the final dribble, it seems you had the following choices:

Shooting foul on B4
Intentional Foul B4
Intentional Foul B3

Because I have a delayed whistle, I would have taken the first foul on B3, since A1 missed. (All my whistles are slow by design.)
If A1 made the layup, then my chosen option would depend on the severity of contact, and the action of B4.
mick

[Hawks Coach]

Mick
Although I tend to support your calls in almost every case, I have to disagree here. B3's contact came before the last dribble, and the ref allows play to continue through to the shot because B3 did not in any way affect the shot. At that point, there is no foul on B3. If B4 doesn't enter the play, you have allowed an unobstructed layup and also decided the contact was incidental. B4 coming across caused the foul that needed to be called, the foul must either be 2 shot shooting foul or INT (or Flagrant), depending on whether B4 made a play on the ball and the severity of te contact.

[mick]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
Mick
Although I tend to support your calls in almost every case, I have to disagree here. B3's contact came before the last dribble, and the ref allows play to continue through to the shot because B3 did not in any way affect the shot. At that point, there is no foul on B3. If B4 doesn't enter the play, you have allowed an unobstructed layup and also decided the contact was incidental. B4 coming across caused the foul that needed to be called, the foul must either be 2 shot shooting foul or INT (or Flagrant), depending on whether B4 made a play on the ball and the severity of te contact.

Coach,
What you say is correct, but I cheat.
If B4 isn't there and the basket is missed, I am gonna call the intentional, before the shot, and I will punish because the grab was unsporting and a cheap attmept to stop a layup.
If B4 isn't there and the basket is made, then my thought is incidental, and I will not reward the unsporting and cheap attempt.
So, no B4 miss... I saw foul before the shot.
And no B4 make... I didn't see enough to call.

I really dislike any unsporting act.

With B4 coming into the play, I still get to chose what I saw and when I saw it. And you know, we may not have seen exactly the same play, yo?

mick

[Hawks Coach]

Mick
Your method is similar to that of the advantage call in soccer, where the refs are instructed to hold their whistle and see if the offense maintains an advantage despite the foul. This provides a way of dealing with fouls in a very appropriate manner IMO. You do not penalize the offense for the poor defensive play, but you penalize the defense if necessary.

I must point out two things wrong with this theory as applied to this play.
1) basketball doesn't use same advantage rule and even if it did,
2) if you manage to keep your footing and control in soccer and get a shot or pass, there is no call even if the shot misses or you flub the pass.

But you got the whistle, call what you see

[mick]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
Mick
Your method is similar to that of the advantage call in soccer, where the refs are instructed to hold their whistle and see if the offense maintains an advantage despite the foul. This provides a way of dealing with fouls in a very appropriate manner IMO. You do not penalize the offense for the poor defensive play, but you penalize the defense if necessary.

I must point out two things wrong with this theory as applied to this play.
1) basketball doesn't use same advantage rule and even if it did,
2) if you manage to keep your footing and control in soccer and get a shot or pass, there is no call even if the shot misses or you flub the pass.

But you got the whistle, call what you see

Well, Coach.
What I gave you was my "mind read".
If I made that call on the floor, without the benefit of a thought process, I would hope you wouldn't notice anything out of the ordinary. Just a good solid call.
mick

[pizanno]

What if the jersey is slightly pulled, but still you feel that A1 isn't affected, do you still hold the whistle?

[Brian Watson]

Being a possible intentional sitch, the thinking might be different but this is a pet peeve of mine with coaches.

Their kid might get nickel and dimed about 10-12 feet out then the same kid hits a jumper or gets the lay-up very soon after.

All the way back up the floor they moan about the "foul" you didn't call, and ignore the bucket they got. Maybe Hawks can answer, but did they even think that if I would have called that, they would not have scored. Granted they might have gotten a bucket after the inbound, but why complain, you got the two, move on and let it go.

[JugglingReferee]

I ended up passing on the INT, and allowed the A player to continue for the layup. I thought the easy 2 points was a better strategy for them. I would have not known that A was going to be fouled on the shot. I think he made 1 of the 2 foul shots and team A ended up winning.

After he was fouled on the shot, I see no way to have called the INT, because a couple of seconds has passed. Too late in my game... I gotta make that decision to call it or not call it, especially at the end of a close game, when 2 seconds will count.

I told the coach after that I made that decision based on my experience in basketball.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally posted by pizanno
What if the jersey is slightly pulled, but still you feel that A1 isn't affected, do you still hold the whistle?

Under the same conditions, I stil hold the whistle. An easy 2 points with 45s left in the game to go from 8 to 10 pts. in a great basket. I think it seals the game.

..Mike

[Indy_Ref]

I'm going to chalk this one up as a "must see it to call it" play. As much as I usually like Mick's answers, I'm going to make my call from what I have read the situation to be and disagree slightly...

I'll call either:

a.) No shot, holding foul on B3, or
b.) No shot, intentional foul on B3.

I'd have to see it to really tell how I would definitely call it. I like to "hold the whistle" but not to that extent. If B3 commits an intentional, I believe you HAVE to stop the play right where the foul is committed--no shot/continuation, 2 FT's + ball at spot nearest foul.

What Mick will call is certainly possible...I just need to see it!

[SCBroncos]

I could be mistaken here, but I believe this scenario is actually in the case book. I don't have one with me right now, but I think it says that if a player tries to foul A1 while A1 is on an uncontested path towards the basket, the official should wait until after the shot is taken before blowing the whistle so as to not punish Team A and take away a chance at the basket.

If the contact was so insignificant that it did not affect A1 in any way, then there is probably no need for any call. If however, the foul was significant or worse yet, intentional, then we should call something, and it looks like this is where we should apply the situation from the case book.

Another way to think about it is say A1 steals the ball and is on the way for a breakaway layup and coach B jumps out on to the court to get a T so as to avoid the free layup. We should let the player shoot the layup, then blow the T on the coach - otherwise we are punishing team A for good play and rewarding Coach B for unsportsmanlike conduct!

[Hawks Coach]

Originally posted by Brian Watson

Being a possible intentional sitch, the thinking might be different but this is a pet peeve of mine with coaches.

Their kid might get nickel and dimed about 10-12 feet out then the same kid hits a jumper or gets the lay-up very soon after.

All the way back up the floor they moan about the "foul" you didn't call, and ignore the bucket they got. Maybe Hawks can answer, but did they even think that if I would have called that, they would not have scored. Granted they might have gotten a bucket after the inbound, but why complain, you got the two, move on and let it go.

When I am on offense, I hate it when the defense gets beat and fouls to avoid an unobstructed layup. I feel fortunate if you let my player continue in for the layup and would never yell about that - any coach that does is off his rocker. You can be comforted in knowing that this guy does not just fail to understand the rules, he doesn't appear to understand the game.

Of course I let all my players know that if they are beat, get the foul on the floor and don't make it intentional (if you are beat so bad you would get an INT, don't foul). It favors the defense to get that foul called away from the basket. I do think the ref needs to decide then and there whether or not you have a foul on the floor. And if it is clearly an INT foul, I would be more inclined to go with the call because they get shots and ball.