Who Owns the Space Above Me?

[carldog]

B1 applies pressure to A1. To protect the ball from tie up, A1 pivots on his left foot, stepping forward and backward with his right foot . A1 also swings the ball forward /up, then backward / down as he pivots. As the ball is backward / down by his right knee, with A1's right foot well behind his left foot and his hips turned sideways, B1 steps in a bit and reaches for the ball so that B1's chin is at A1's hip - belly. A1 then brings the ball rapidly forward / up and contacts B1 in his orthodontically perfect teeth with the ball (or forearm...or elbow..)

What's the call?

Thanks!

[Ref in PA]

This is probably a play you would have to see to call correctly. If B1 steps in on A1 and A1 straightens up making body to body contact, I would either call the foul on B1 or have a no call. If A1 leads with his elbow, and the only contact is A1's elbow on B1's jaw (B1 being able to get out of the way with his body) then I would either have a no call, foul on B1 or a foul on A1. I can envision plays where even though there was contact, I would let the play go (with hopefully a lessoned learned by B1). I can also see in my mind plays where the contact by B1 warrants a foul call. I can also see plays where A1's elbow was on purpose and call a player control foul and possible a flagrant foul if the elbow was extremely severe. I would also have to answer in my mind if B1 was "acting" when the contact occurred.

Bottom line is yes, A1 owns his space above him, but when A1 stretches out, a little judgement comes into play. You would have to see the play to make the correct call.

[BktBallRef]

I got nutin'.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Ref in PA
This is probably a play you would have to see to call correctly. If B1 steps in on A1 and A1 straightens up making body to body contact, I would either call the foul on B1 or have a no call. If A1 leads with his elbow, and the only contact is A1's elbow on B1's jaw (B1 being able to get out of the way with his body) then I would either have a no call, foul on B1 or a foul on A1. I can envision plays where even though there was contact, I would let the play go (with hopefully a lessoned learned by B1). I can also see in my mind plays where the contact by B1 warrants a foul call. I can also see plays where A1's elbow was on purpose and call a player control foul and possible a flagrant foul if the elbow was extremely severe. I would also have to answer in my mind if B1 was "acting" when the contact occurred.

Bottom line is yes, A1 owns his space above him, but when A1 stretches out, a little judgement comes into play. You would have to see the play to make the correct call.

Which player encroached upon the other player's "cylinder of "verticality?"

MTD, Sr.

[carldog]

In my mind's eye...I see B1 encroaching on A1's cylinder of verticality....although with the body positions I described earlier, the space above either player sure ain't a cylinder!

B1 can't step in / reach in, belly-to-belly, trying to tip the ball without some part of his body taking up space above A1. It might just be A1's foot/ knee / leg, but I still see B1 inside A1's airspace.

I understand the point about flagrant elbows...but I guess I am going to continue to tell players to pivot and 'rip' the ball with strength from high / forward to low / backward, and repeat as needed.

Lead with the ball / hand / forearm...not elbow.

[Camron Rust]

Each player generally owns the space above their vertical torso. Conact with an extended limb, if sufficient for a foul, is a foul on the owner of the limb.

In this case, the contact was with the ball. Unless it was deliberate, it is nothing.

If B1 had stepped in with both feet on the floor without making contact and obtained a vertical position over A1's outstretched leg, it would be a foul on A1 to contact B1. When A stretched out, he gave up the space above his foot since he was not longer occupying it. He's occupying a different space now and only have vertical rights to that space...not both.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Which player encroached upon the other player's "cylinder of "verticality?"

It's a cylinder now? Didn't it used to be a cone? Is that one of those editorial changes in the new book that they don't tell anyone about?!

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by rainmaker

It's a cylinder now? Didn't it used to be a cone? Is that one of those editorial changes in the new book that they don't tell anyone about?!

Juulie:

I have always used "cylinder of verticality." Somebody mistakenly used "cone" instead of "cylinder." "Cylinder" is a very good way to describe the area around any give player.

MTD, Sr.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Juulie:

I have always used "cylinder of verticality." Somebody mistakenly used "cone" instead of "cylinder." "Cylinder" is a very good way to describe the area around any give player.

MTD, Sr.

Yep, and that somebody was you.

How far out does this "cylinder" go Mark? Does it incompass an extended limb, like you said it did last time? Does it bend horizontally and snap back to vertical, like you said it should before?

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally posted by rainmaker

It's a cylinder now? Didn't it used to be a cone? Is that one of those editorial changes in the new book that they don't tell anyone about?!

Rumor is that next year's Fed test will include a section on 3-dimensional Euclidean geometery. Not only will you need to know who owns the cylinder, you'll need to calculate it's circumference and volume.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by blindzebra

Yep, and that somebody was you.

How far out does this "cylinder" go Mark? Does it incompass an extended limb, like you said it did last time? Does it bend horizontally and snap back to vertical, like you said it should before?

Once and for all: I NEVER USED THE WORD "CONE." I USED THE TERM "CYLINDER OF VERTICALITY." I DON'T REMEMBER WHO USED THE TERM "CONE" BUT IT WASN'T ME.

MTD, Sr.

[FrankHtown]

I think we're confusing the "cone of silence" with the "cylinder of verticality." Wow, did I just date myself!!!