Partner last night passed on a collision underneath the basket. Dribbler comes in for lay-up and defender parks himself under the basket. Minor collision. No call.

I'm thinking good job. Coach wants a call.

Partner feels there is something in the rule book about being under the basket is not a proper guarding position. I said "No it's not in the NFHS book. But it's a proper no call for a minor collision. The defender is obviously not defending anything or trying to block the shot. He is just looking to collect the PC foul. I think it was an excellent no call."

He is certain that it is in the rule book or it was a POE a couple years ago.

Can any of you rules gurus clear this up for us - is there something in the book about this particular situation? I didn't find it.

I know the NBA has their semi-circle and it seems the NCAA was at least testing a similar rule at the beginning of this season but I don't think it has trickled down to the NFHS. Anyone?

It hasn't been in there as long as I've been officiating (5-6 seasons). Is it possible that this was something an association agreed upon? I wouldn't think so, but you never know.

All I can see ......

SECTION 27 INCIDENTAL CONTACT
Incidental contact is contact with an opponent which is permitted and which does not constitute a foul.
ART. 1 . . . The mere fact that contact occurs does not constitute a foul. When 10 players are moving rapidly in a limited area, some contact is certain to occur.
ART. 2 . . . Contact which occurs unintentionally in an effort by an opponent to reach a loose ball, or contact which may result when opponents are in equally favorable positions to perform normal defensive or offensive movements, should not be considered illegal, even though the contact may be severe.

ART. 3 . . . Similarly, contact which does not hinder the opponent from participating in normal defensive or offensive movements should be considered incidental.
ART. 4 . . . A player who is screened within his/her visual field is expected to avoid contact with the screener by stopping or going around the screener. In cases of screens outside the visual field, the opponent may make inadvertent contact with the screener, and such contact is to be ruled incidental contact, provided the screener is not displaced if he/she has the ball.

ART. 5 . . . If, however, a player approaches an opponent from behind or from a position from which he/she has no reasonable chance to play the ball without making contact with the opponent, the responsibility is on the player in the unfavorable position.

Case 10.6.1D

It's not what we don't know that gets us in trouble, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so.

Thanks Bob.

Obviously that is the opposite answer from what he wanted. But the point is "it ain't in there."