This may have been covered before, but...

Player A is dribbling, and the defender does not establish position. As the two make contact, Player A lowers is shoulder.

Is this a double foul?

There's nothing in the rules that says a player can't lower his shoulder, yet you hear coaches, players, and fans screaming it. If the defender hasn't established a legal guarded position, this is a block.

Okay, let me rephrase, the player lowers his shoulder and then pushes off with an arm.

The onus is still on the defender to establish legal guarding position. That is why we referee the defense. If he is legally established, fouls go to the offense, if he has not legally established positionh, the fouls will be on the defense (in a nutshell).

The path of the ball handler is important here, I think.
With the defender running a bit ahead of the ball-handler and the ball-handler sharply turning into the defensive player, lowered shoulder, or not, and hitting the defender, who hadn't established legal guarding position, sometimes we have to call a player control foul.
mick

This is probably a debatable point, but, if the dribbler pushes off, I don't care if the defender has legal position or not. I am going to call a PC foul.

I agree with Mick's last post.

I would call the push-off
 

In general, if the contact is initiated by the player in control of the ball, and he pushes off I will call the PC foul whether the defender is set or not. Just because the defender is moving doesn't mean he doesn't have a legal guarding position. The defender can move in the same direction as the player with the ball.

The requirements for establishing legal guarding position
and getting to the spot first only apply for
torso to torso contact. A push off is quite different,
it's a PC.

What if the offensive player just isn't in control? I know you have all seen the player who dribbles as fast as he can full court with the head down.

Same question, defender does not have legal guarding position, and they collide.

Referee the Defense
 

Rookie,
Watch the defender's actions! Did he reach and hit the outa control dribbler, did he stick out a leg?
Or was he merely playing good defense?
Then penalize the fouling player.
mick

[Edited by mick on Mar 21st, 2001 at 01:40 PM]

Let me jump in here and say that I had this same situation happen to me last year. I called a double foul and here's my reasoning. A1 was dribbling near the midcourt line when B1 approached from the side and a little behind. At the rate B1 was closing in I was anticipating him to foul A1. Sure enough he pretty much ran flat into A1. But just as he made contact with A1 with his waist, A1 reached out with his forearm and pushed B1 in the chest. I was already blowing my whistle for the foul on B1 when I saw the push by A1. I had not pointed to either player yet so I was able to give the double foul signal.
Both coaches claimed I could not have both an offensive foul and a defensive foul at the same time, it should be one or the other. I told them that just as B ran into A, A pushed B. Since in my opinion, both players had committed illegal acts, I wasn't going to reward either player by calling the foul on his opponent. Both coaches grumbled a little but the game went on. I felt this was right since both acts happened simultaneously. If I'm wrong let me know the proper rationale.

Well, since you asked...

You're wrong on 2 counts. You done good by refereeing
the defense but you seem to have anticipated the foul
here and couldn't resist blowing as soon as you saw it.
You should have held the whistle & let the play develop,
clearly it wasn't over. Having blown the whistle for
the *block*, any subsequent contact should have been
ignored unless it was intentional or flagrant.
The push off sounds like it was neither so you should
have gone with the block.

Singing the same tune as Dan.
 

MJ,
Your call may have been dead on, rule book correct, but I'm with Dan here, as usual. Keep the game at the lowest common denominator. You saw the block, called the block, and you should have reported the block as was your initial intention. And, don't forget the ball was dead when you recognized that initial foul.

Again, with Dan, don't call that offensive foul unless it's a technical foul, retaliatory and after the play, or an intentional, or flagrant, foul.

You could've had a word with the dribbler and had told him to cool it, if you really thought it was something that could have gotten worse later.

Keep it simple.

As we say on the baseball side, don't go looking for boogers; don't go looking to use every rule in the book every time down the court. Heck, the coaches won't understand it anyway, except Hawk's coach.

mick

Lets look at this play. A1 is dribbling and you have stated that B1 has not established a position. What do you mean by: establish position.

NFHS R4-S23 Guarding:
R4-S23-A1: Guarding the act of legally placing the body
in the path of an offensive opponent. There is no mini-
mum distance required between the guard and opponent, but
the masimum is six feet when closely guarded. Every pla-
yer is entitled to a spot on the floor provided such pla-
yer gets there first without illegally contacting an oppo-
nent. A player who extends an arm, shoulder, hip or leg
into the path of an opponent is not considered to have a
legal position if contact occurs.

R4-S23-A2: To obtain an initial legal guarding position:
a. The guard must have both feet touching the floor.
b. The front of the guard's torso must be facing the
opponent.

R4-S23-A3: After the initial legal guarding position is
obtained:
a. The guard is not required to have either or both
feet on the floor or continue facing the opponent.
b. The guard may move laterally or obliquely to main-
tain position, provided it is not toward the oppo-
nent when contact occurs.
c. The guard may raise hands or jump with his/her own
vertical plane.
d. The guard may turn or duck to absorb the shock of
imminent contact.

R4-S23-A4: Guarding an opponent with the ball or a sta-
tionary opponent without the ball:
a. No time or distance is required to obtain an initial
legal position.
b. If the opponent with the ball is airborne, the guard
must have obtained legal position before the oppo-
nent left the floor.

NFHS R10-S6 Contact:
R10-S6-A1: A player shall not: hold, push, charge, trip;
nor impede the progress of an opponent by extending an
arm, shoulder, hip or knee, or by bending the body into
other than a normal position; nor use any rough tactics.

My question is: How did A1 and B1 may contact with each other? As previously stated, an official must referee the defense. But we must also apply the rules quoted above when observing guarding against the ball handler.

We all see too many players that dribble with their free arm held out away from their body. NFHS R10-S6-A1 further states that: A player may not use the forearm and hand to prevent an opponent from attacking the ball during a dribble or when throwing for a goal.

Many times a defender moves toward the dribbler to obtain a legal guarding position and to attack the ball and the dribbler holds out his/her forearm and hand and contacts the defender on the body, arm, or hand. Even though defender is moving toward the dribbler and may not have obtained a legal guarding position, the contact by the dribbler just described should be considered a foul by the dribbler.

The lowering of the shoulder by the dribbler is not illegal it could be construed as illegal contact by the dribbler if the defender has met all of the conditions above.

I had a play about four years ago where A1 was dribbling downcourt with B1 running downcourt next to her on leftside. B2 established (NCAA Women's rules) a legal guarding position against A1 in such a manner that required A1 to juke to her left to avoid contact with her. When A1 juked to her left her shoulder made contact with B1's chest and knocked her down. Charging against A1. Why? B1 had established her legal guarding position while running downcourt alongside A1.

We really cannot make a ruling on this play without it being described in further detail. Was B1 moving toward A1?
Was B1 standing off to the side of A1 but was facing A1?

Huh?
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.


Sorry, Mark.
I don't quite get it... again.
mick

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Quote:

...Charging against A1...

Oh boy, now you've done it. You mean PC, no? ;)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dan_ref

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Quote: ...Charging against A1... Oh boy, now you've done it. You mean PC, no? ;)

The foul by A1 was charging, see the NFHS and NCAA definitions of charging.

Was the foul a personal foul? Yes, it was a contact foul while the ball was live.

Was the foul a common foul? Yes, it was a personal foul that was neither intentional nor flagrant, nor committed against a player trying or tapping the ball for a field goal nor part of a double [personal] or multiple foul.

Was the foul a player control foul? Yes. A player control foul is a common foul committed by a player in control of the ball.

Nothing dificult about my call. Yes, I had one the palms of one of my hands against the back of my head and my other hand pointing in the opposite direction.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Quote:

Originally posted by Dan_ref Quote: Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Quote: ...Charging against A1... Oh boy, now you've done it. You mean PC, no? ;) ... Was the foul a player control foul? Yes. A player control foul is a common foul committed by a player in control of the ball. Nothing dificult about my call. Yes, I had one the palms of one of my hands against the back of my head and my other hand pointing in the opposite direction.

Then by definition you did not have a charge, you had a PC.
(Oh brother, I really hate to go through this again.)

It's tough...
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dan_ref

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Quote: Originally posted by Dan_ref Quote: Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Quote: ...Charging against A1... Oh boy, now you've done it. You mean PC, no? ;) ... Was the foul a player control foul? Yes. A player control foul is a common foul committed by a player in control of the ball. Nothing dificult about my call. Yes, I had one the palms of one of my hands against the back of my head and my other hand pointing in the opposite direction. Then by definition you did not have a charge, you had a PC. (Oh brother, I really hate to go through this again.)

...When a guy has to explain his sense of humor.
Some guys just can't tell a joke. You need more practice.
Thirty-seven ! :)
mick

Makes sense to me... thanks for the explinationn :)

I am sorry that I did not understand Dan's humor. But too many officials get themselves into trouble because they do not speak in the technical terms of their sport when explaining rulings.

Charging is illegal personal contact caused by pushing or moving into an opponent's torso. When officiating the defense we have to rule first as to whether the contact was legal or illegal. If the contact is illegal we have to decided if it was a block or a charge. And, finally if the contact was by a player in control of the ball, the foul is a player control foul.

Too many times this year I have called player control foul on a A1 for hooking B1, and when I gave the player control foul the first words out of the A1's coach's mouth was: How can that be charging?

Or, when A1, who is control of the ball goes airborne, passes the ball of to A2 then charges into a B1, had a legal position on the floor. Team B is is in the bonus situation. I give the charging signal and then award B1 free throws, and Team A's coach complains that B does not get free throws for a "offensive" foul.

In the play I described earlier I did have a charging foul and in this case this charging foul was a player control foul.

The point I am trying to make here is that we has officials must now what is in Rule 4 and use the language of the rule book. When we use words and phrases that do not appear in the rule book to describe plays and rulings we cause more problems for use than we solve. Coaches will use any advantage that they can get against us to cause us problems. That is just the nature of the beast.

When people present plays for discussion, it is because they are really trying to start honest discussions for the benefit of everybody. But when we do not use the correct language it just mucks up the whole problem.

This is the biggest problem I have to overcome with new students in my officiating class (and too many veteran officials for that matter). New students use words and descriptions that they have heard TV and radio announcers use (and too many times veteran officials also) that do not accurately explain the ruling or what accutually happened on the court. Besides "offensive" foul for NCAA and NFHS games the use of goaltending for both goaltending and basketball interference. We are our own worst enemy. If we use the language of our sport we will be able to a much better job of educating the layman in the rules and mechanics of the sport.

OK, so maybe you'll be kind enough to explain how I didn't
use the language of the rule book, or the correct language
or said anything that would confuse a rookie, vet or layman?
Of course, by saying you had a *charge* instead of a PC
you were not precise, since a charge has consequences by
rule that a PC does not. (I did say I didn't want to
go through this again so this will be the end of the
thread for me.)

Re: It's tough...
 

I gotta remember those damn smiley faces, this has gotten
me into more trouble than I care to remember!

:) <<<<<< Smiley face here

So, is there a situation where charging would not be PC? What is the difference between charging and pushing?

--Denny

Oh no! Here we go again!

Dan! This is all your fault! :)

Check this out
 

d,
Look for this thread, below. ;)

gregbrown8 23 292 Mar 19th, 2001

mick