The Official Forum - Violent collision, equal opportunity to the ball?

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)

- - Violent collision, equal opportunity to the ball? (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/18814-violent-collision-equal-opportunity-ball.html)

Quote:

Originally posted by mick

Quote:

Originally posted by Dudly
Had a similar play at a camp. I saw neither player gaining an advantage or placing the other at a disadvantage, so I no called it. Both players are on the floor. I was told that anytime a player hits the floor hard I have to call something.
Still to this day I remember that, still to this day I choose to ignore that comment.

That advice rings in my head often, Dudly.
Right or wrong, I look for a reason to call something, rather than simply disregard the notion.
mick

I understand where you are coming from but if neither is at an advantage what bearing does "calling something because someone is on the floor" have other than appeasing the coaches? By the way I've been "guilty" of doing this in the past but I've become less inclined to doing this lately. Now depending upon how the game is going dictates whether I do this or not. For example if it's been relatively clean game I might have a no call. If its been a game plagued by fouls and rough play I probably will call something.

It is if the ball is coming down after it hits the glass. What would you call it?

Quote:

Originally posted by gordon30307
That advice rings in my head often, Dudly.
Right or wrong, I look for a reason to call something, rather than simply disregard the notion.
mick

I understand where you are coming from but if neither is at an advantage what bearing does "calling something because someone is on the floor" have other than appeasing the coaches? [/B][/QUOTE]

You obviously do not understand.
An action yielding a no-call can be an easy out, if explained away by "incidental contact".

I look really hard before I no-call with one or two players on the floor. I won't take the easy way out, I get paid to make the hard calls, not for merely getting dressed.
mick

Quote:

Originally posted by IREFU2
It is if the ball is coming down after it hits the glass. What would you call it?

Not talking about rebounding. Referring to a pass in "open court" with two players going for the ball with a collision where neither has an advantage..

Quote:

Originally posted by mick

Quote:

Originally posted by gordon30307
That advice rings in my head often, Dudly.
Right or wrong, I look for a reason to call something, rather than simply disregard the notion.
mick

I understand where you are coming from but if neither is at an advantage what bearing does "calling something because someone is on the floor" have other than appeasing the coaches?

You obviously do not understand.
An action yielding a no-call can be an easy out, if explained away by "incidental contact".

I look really hard before I no-call with one or two players on the floor. I won't take the easy way out, I get paid to make the hard calls, not for merely getting dressed.
mick
[/B][/QUOTE]

Hi Mick, I disagree that a no call after a collision is an "easy out". Normally with one or two players on the floor with no call your going to hear from one or both coache's complaining. Somewhere in the rule or case book there a statement that talks about collisions sometimes violent (obviously no advantage) that are considered to be "incidental contact" Now the type of play I'm referring to is a long pass where A1 and B1 get there at the same time with a violent collision. You have something like this and you have one or both coaches begging for a call.

Quote:

Originally posted by gordon30307

Quote:

Originally posted by mick

Quote:

Originally posted by gordon30307
That advice rings in my head often, Dudly.
Right or wrong, I look for a reason to call something, rather than simply disregard the notion.
mick

I understand where you are coming from but if neither is at an advantage what bearing does "calling something because someone is on the floor" have other than appeasing the coaches?

You obviously do not understand.
An action yielding a no-call can be an easy out, if explained away by "incidental contact".

I look really hard before I no-call with one or two players on the floor. I won't take the easy way out, I get paid to make the hard calls, not for merely getting dressed.
mick

Hi Mick, I disagree that a no call after a collision is an "easy out". Normally with one or two players on the floor with no call your going to hear from one or both coache's complaining. Somewhere in the rule or case book there a statement that talks about collisions sometimes violent (obviously no advantage) that are considered to be "incidental contact" Now the type of play I'm referring to is a long pass where A1 and B1 get there at the same time with a violent collision. You have something like this and you have one or both coaches begging for a call. [/B][/QUOTE]

gordon30307,
If one simply looks at the point of contact, one takes the easy way out in making a decision.

See the entire play. Where was A1 before the contact? Where was B1? Were they after the ball? After the opponent? Did both players go straight up? Did they come from equal angles on intersecting lines? was a player cut-off, checked before the ball was touched? Did one player attempt to go through the opponent toward the ball?

Hurry! Hurry! Compute! Determine! Adjudge! You've got 0.80 seconds!
Whew! That was an easy no-call! ;)
mick

Quote:

Originally posted by gordon30307

Hi Mick, I disagree that a no call after a collision is an "easy out". Normally with one or two players on the floor with no call your going to hear from one or both coache's complaining. Somewhere in the rule or case book there a statement that talks about collisions sometimes violent (obviously no advantage) that are considered to be "incidental contact" Now the type of play I'm referring to is a long pass where A1 and B1 get there at the same time with a violent collision. You have something like this and you have one or both coaches begging for a call.

You cannot make calls just because a coach wants one. The rules make it very clear that a violent collision can take place and nothing should be called. This is all laid out clearly in rule 4-27-2.

Quote:

Originally posted by mick

Quote:

Originally posted by gordon30307

Quote:

Originally posted by mick

Quote:

Originally posted by gordon30307
That advice rings in my head often, Dudly.
Right or wrong, I look for a reason to call something, rather than simply disregard the notion.
mick

I understand where you are coming from but if neither is at an advantage what bearing does "calling something because someone is on the floor" have other than appeasing the coaches?

You obviously do not understand.
An action yielding a no-call can be an easy out, if explained away by "incidental contact".

I look really hard before I no-call with one or two players on the floor. I won't take the easy way out, I get paid to make the hard calls, not for merely getting dressed.
mick

Hi Mick, I disagree that a no call after a collision is an "easy out". Normally with one or two players on the floor with no call your going to hear from one or both coache's complaining. Somewhere in the rule or case book there a statement that talks about collisions sometimes violent (obviously no advantage) that are considered to be "incidental contact" Now the type of play I'm referring to is a long pass where A1 and B1 get there at the same time with a violent collision. You have something like this and you have one or both coaches begging for a call.

gordon30307,
If one simply looks at the point of contact, one takes the easy way out in making a decision.

See the entire play. Where was A1 before the contact? Where was B1? Were they after the ball? After the opponent? Did both players go straight up? Did they come from equal angles on intersecting lines? was a player cut-off, checked before the ball was touched? Did one player attempt to go through the opponent toward the ball?

Hurry! Hurry! Compute! Determine! Adjudge! You've got 0.80 seconds!
Whew! That was an easy no-call! ;)
mick

Hi Mick, Obviously if one player puts the other at at a disadvantage I've got a call. What I disagree with is the blanket statement if one or both players are on the floor you've got to have a foul. When you've got an ugly train wreck where there is no advantage the "no call" is the tougher call.
[/B][/QUOTE]