A1 is fronted by B1 in the post. A2 makes a successful entry pass and A1 pivots toward the basket (B1 still has legal guarding position). As A1 begins his shot, B2 comes in to attempt a block. A1 attempts to avoid the block by pivoting back. The back of A1's head directly hits B1 square in the face, knocking him down. Again, B1 has LGP. Player control, inadvertant contact, no call? What would you have?

Incidental contact.

Pretty sure that A1 didn't use his head to move B1 or to gain a more advantageous position, as would happen with a shoulder or forearm to A1's midsection.

No call from me.

I may have blown this one. I went with a player control. Mainly because the contact was severe. The sound was awful (from the heads hitting) and I did not want a situation where a kid went down hurt and there was no whistle. Needless to say, the coach of A1 did not like the call.

Player control foul. You said it yourself that B1 had a legal guarding position against A1 and A1's contact with B1 knocked B1 down.

MTD, Sr.

You may or may not have blown it. It's a judgment call. But just because the contact is severe does not mean it wasn't incidental. Check the definition below, as the <B>boldface</b> text covers your concern while the <U>underlined</U> covers Mark's concern.

4-27-2
...contact which may result when opponents are in <U>equally favorable positions to perform normal defensive or offensive movements,</U> should not be considered illegal, <B>even though the contact may be severe.</b>

To me, your play is the classic example of severe contact that is incidental. The fact that B1 had LGP does not mean that any contactg created by A1 is a PC foul, even severe contact.

No call from me.

So, if A1 turns, stomps on B1's ingrown toenail, and B1 falls to the floor in agony, it's a PC foul on A1? B1 had LGP and A1's contact caused B1 to hit the floor. Gotta be a PC, right? :D

A player falling to the floor is a poor criteria for calling a foul, Mark. What if he just took the knock to the head but he stays on his feet? What if, in the original play, he flopped? Poor criteria, Mark.

Tony:

We aren't talking about two players going after a ball from equally advantageous positions, and the fact that the contact between A1 and B1 was severe. B1 had a legal guarding position against A1. A1 pivoted to avoid being guarded by B2 and knocked B1. That is a foul by A1.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. Why are we writing about basketball when the Super Bowl is on television. LOL

No, we aren't. And the portion of the rule that I quoted above is not addressing a loose ball situation. Perhaps you don't understand the meaning of the word "OR."

Allow me to breakdown 4-27-2 for you.

1- Contact which occurs unintentionally in an effort by an opponent to reach a loose ball,

<B>OR</B>

2- 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.

C'mon Mark, you're smarter than that. You know full well that this rule is addressing two DIFFERENT situations that are possible. At least, I hope you're smarter than that.

I do not want to know why you inspect everyone's toenails before the game to know which players have ingrown toenails. Yuck.

I agree with what you have said Tony, but re-read the original play. A1 is being double-teamed by B1 and B2. B1 and B2 had legal guarding positions against A1. A1 moved to avoid B2 and knocked down B1; that type of contact is not incidental contact. The contact between A1 and B1 was not incidental contact that was the result of two players being in equally advantageous positions. I am not concerned about how severe the contact is, just the fact the A1's contact with B1 displaced B1 from his legal guarding position.

MTD, Sr.

Tony:

I am going to ignore the ingrown tail situation. The fact that the contact between A1 and B1 was with their heads is not important. A1's contact displaced B1 from his legal guarding position. It would not matter if A1's head hit B1 in the chest, if the contact knocks B1 down, then A1 has committed a foul.

MTD, Sr.

I am going to ignore the ingrown <font color = red>tail</font> situation.

[/B][/QUOTE]Ingrown <b>tail</b>?

Sounds painful. Is there a cure for that?

Mark, you agree with what I say but you'd call a foul? That makes no sense. Read the post. "...The back of A1's head directly hits B1 square in the face..." B is not displaced. He chooses to fall down when there's contact to his faced. That's a foul? Not if it's my call.

Mark, if you call everything in a game that you advocate calling here on this board, then your games must have a hundred fouls and last for three hours, with only 3 players from each team on the floor at game's end. :D

[Edited by BktBallRef on Feb 6th, 2005 at 10:57 PM]

Certainly its a foul. The contact was not incidental. A1 was moving to avoid B2 and made contact with B1 who had a legal guarding position against A1. It is an obvious case of A1 invading B1's cylinder of verticality ;-).

MTD, Sr.

Got news for you, Mark. All contact is created by someone moving. it makes no difference why he was moving.

Let us know the next time you have contact without someone moving. ;)