hand checking - Page 2

mick · #16 (**permalink**) Tue Dec 14, 2004, 09:08am

Quote:

Originally posted by IREFU2
SECTION 24 HANDS AND ARMS, LEGAL AND ILLEGAL USE

ART. 5 . . . It is not legal to use hands on an opponent which in any way inhibits the freedom of movement of the opponent or acts as an aid to a player in starting or stopping.

~~As long as it doesnt impede the players progress.~~

[From POE 2003-2004]
A. Handchecking: Regardless of where it takes place on the floor, when a player continuously places a hand on the opponent, it is a foul.

mick

IREFU2 · #17 (**permalink**) Tue Dec 14, 2004, 09:13am

Thanks for your correction, but I was not assuming. I usually do some preventive officiating here. I will always tell them hands down and if they dont stop, then I call the foul.

Jimgolf · #18 (**permalink**) Tue Dec 14, 2004, 09:58am

Hand checking is an unfair advantage to the defense and should be called regardless of displacement. The consideration should be whether the contact is incidental (allowed) or a consistent tactic of the defender (foul). Hand-checking can inhibit the free movement of the offensive player in ways that are not always obvious from an official's perspective due to the distance and size of the hands.

As MTD points out, there is no legitimate basketball reason to place a hand on an offensive player other than to inhibit movement or intimidate the player.

roadking · #19 (**permalink**) Tue Dec 14, 2004, 10:11am

thanks for the input. good forum!

gordon30307 · #20 (**permalink**) Tue Dec 14, 2004, 10:18am

Quote:

Originally posted by TravelinMan

Quote:

Originally posted by gordon30307

Quote:

Originally posted by roadking
does the fact that a defensive player is making contact with his hand without any diplacement of the offensive ball handler justify a hand check call? i normally dont make this call unless i see displacement. i had a jv coach complain the whole game to us. i basically told him just because theres contact it does not justify a foul call without displacement, do you agree with this statement and how would you handle the coach in this situation. this was not a tight game his team won by 25.

If they're going from east to west I generally won't call it unless there's an advantage gained. Going north and south especially driving to the basket I will call it. Doesn't take much to disrupt a scoring chance. Really no reason to have your hand on the dribblers back.

Gordon, maybe hand checking is forcing offensive player to go east-west, i.e., change direction. Just a thought.

Please see quote above unless an advantage gained. If so "tweet"

JRutledge · #21 (**permalink**) Tue Dec 14, 2004, 11:02am

Quote:

Originally posted by Jimgolf
Hand checking is an unfair advantage to the defense and should be called regardless of displacement. The consideration should be whether the contact is incidental (allowed) or a consistent tactic of the defender (foul). Hand-checking can inhibit the free movement of the offensive player in ways that are not always obvious from an official's perspective due to the distance and size of the hands.

I would have to disagree with you there. The NF in their POE a few years back suggested there had to be displacement. And the NCAA always talks about (Men's side) displacement in their bulletins.

Peace

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. · #22 (**permalink**) Tue Dec 14, 2004, 11:34am

Quote:

Originally posted by mick

Quote:

Originally posted by IREFU2
SECTION 24 HANDS AND ARMS, LEGAL AND ILLEGAL USE

ART. 5 . . . It is not legal to use hands on an opponent which in any way inhibits the freedom of movement of the opponent or acts as an aid to a player in starting or stopping.

~~As long as it doesnt impede the players progress.~~

[From POE 2003-2004]
A. Handchecking: Regardless of where it takes place on the floor, when a player continuously places a hand on the opponent, it is a foul.

mick

Mick:

You have hit the nail right smack on the head, which then begs the question to the rest of the Forum:

B1 is directly in front of A1 and is guarding A1. A1 is either a) holding the ball, or b) dribbling the ball. Why does B1 have to put his hands on A1?

MTD, Sr.

gordon30307 · #23 (**permalink**) Tue Dec 14, 2004, 03:28pm

Mick:

You have hit the nail right smack on the head, which then begs the question to the rest of the Forum:

B1 is directly in front of A1 and is guarding A1. A1 is either a) holding the ball, or b) dribbling the ball. Why does B1 have to put his hands on A1?

MTD, Sr.
[/B][/QUOTE]

I agree he doesn't. If A1 makes his move and B1 displaces him tweet. If A1 is just standing there why call the foul if nothing is happening. Incidently I'll do everything I can to get hands off. I agree that you wouldn't be wrong if you called a foul. If A1 has good position in which to score why not hold that whistle and see what happens?