I'm not going to chime in on this just yet. I'd like your analysis of both situations and why you ruled as you did.

Play situation number 1:

Player B-2 approaches A-1 who is dribbling the ball in his front court from behind. B-2 is out of the visual field of A-1 (he doesn't have eyes behind his head). B-2, having no reasonable chance to play the ball without making contact, reaches in and hits the ball which ricochets to B-1. Minor contact is made to A-1's left hip.

RULING -

Play situation number 2:

Player B-2 approaches A-1 who is dribbling the ball in his front court from behind. B-2 is out of the visual field of A-1 (he doesn't have eyes behind his head). B-2, having no reasonable chance to play the ball without making contact, reaches in and hits the ball which ricochets out of bounds without being touched again. Minor contact is made to A-1's left hip. What if the contact was more severe?

RULING -

I am using the thread as a training tool. Thanks for your input!

Well first off I'd say I would need to see both plays to really say what I'd call. But going by advantage/disadvantage, I would be more willing to pass on calling a foul in the second situation, since A is getting the ball anyways. I'd be more willing to call a foul in sit A if I feel the contact warranted a foul, since team A lost the ball. Again, it would depend on how much contact, but I will pass on a foul if it's not bonus and the same team gets the ball back. Just my humble opinion, hope this helps and doesn't start a big argument.

I'm looking for the different points of view, however, I don't want to catagorize them as arguments. Thank you!

Well did the team A coach want a foul? If so then it was a foul.

As was said, I would need to see the severity of the contact to truly rule on the play. The second sitch doesn't really sound like I would be calling a foul. Minor contact that didn't affect the path of the dribbler and they are getting the ball back. If the contact affects the path of the dribbler I am more likly to call the foul. I guess I would look at the first situation the same way.

Minor contact!

Your idea of minor contact and my idea of minor contact probably differs...

In both situations if the contact affected the path of the dribbler I would call the foul. If the dribblers path is unaffected I probably would not.

[Edited by w_sohl on Jun 12th, 2005 at 02:51 PM]

I don't really know what you're looking for here. There's no definitive answer to either of your plays. As w_sohl stated, your idea and my idea of what is inor contact maybe totally different.

But I will say this: the fact that B2 is outside of A1's visual field has absolutely nothing to do with whether a foul is called of not.

What age group and gender are we talking here? If we've got a girls game or younger players, it usually takes less contact to equal a foul. In situation A, which hand was A1 dribbling with when B2 hit his left hip? If A1 lost the ball because of the contact, then I've got a foul. I think you need a patient whistle here because if there was minor contact and then the ball still stayed with team A then maybe you pass.

In situation 2, I've probably got a throw in for team A. Save time and the unless the contact was severe or B2 has been messing with the flow of your game.

Which came first the ball getting hit or the "minor" contact?

If B2 hit the ball first, I probably have nothing unless the contact hinders A1 from going after the loose ball.

1. Gotta see it to make a call.

2. See #1.

When my son played ball in HS, he had a T-shirt that had a picture of a guy on a gurney being loaded into an ambulance. Underneath the picture it read:

"No reconstructive surgery - no foul"

That seems to apply here.

I am most likely to pass on sitch 2. In sitch 1 it would depend on several factors. Did the contact cause the turnover? Was it more than just incidental? And as said before, what level of skill do we have.

Did the contact create the oportunity for B2 to make a play on the ball or did it cause A1 to lose the ball? If not, I've probably got no foul in both situations.

What age group and gender are we talking here? If we've got a girls game or younger players, it usually takes less contact to equal a foul. In situation A, which hand was A1 dribbling with when B2 hit his left hip? If A1 lost the ball because of the contact, then I've got a foul. I think you need a patient whistle here because if there was minor contact and then the ball still stayed with team A then maybe you pass.

In situation 2, I've probably got a throw in for team A. Save time and the unless the contact was severe or B2 has been messing with the flow of your game. [/B][/QUOTE]

Chris - thank you. I am looking for the "patient whistle" in both situations. I am attempting to instill the fact that we need to see the whole play from start to finish. Many referees have a quick whistle and do not officiate advantage/disadvantage. I know many have asked about the severity of the contact and how their view may be different than mine. I understand what you are explaining.

Chris - thank you. I am looking for the "patient whistle" in both situations. I am attempting to instill the fact that we need to see the whole play from start to finish. Many referees have a quick whistle and do not officiate advantage/disadvantage. I know many have asked about the severity of the contact and how their view may be different than mine. I understand what you are explaining. [/B][/QUOTE]

I'm confused. Did you want our input and help or are you giving us a test or quiz to see if we pass? Just to let you know if that is the case you are on the wrong board to do that. If you have a question about a rule or have a real play that you would like some honest input on how to handle better, then you are at the right place.

If this was a play that you are having trouble with I apologize for the above questions.

I'm confused. Did you want our input and help or are you giving us a test or quiz to see if we pass? Just to let you know if that is the case you are on the wrong board to do that. If you have a question about a rule or have a real play that you would like some honest input on how to handle better, then you are at the right place.

[/B][/QUOTE]Agree with Mr. Hodges. The original question was and is unanswerable without actually seeing the play. The point that you were trying to make was fine. The way that you tried to do it? Not so fine.

Sooooo, what do I win?

Nothing.
That's the point.
The entire thread was a waste of time.

I hear what your saying and I'm just being a little sarcastic myself. Whatever his motive, it's a worthwhile thread.

I apologize. I was not attempting to make this a quiz. My intent was to learn how some veteran officials would handle the situation. I was hoping to hear more about the patient whistle and how this helps the game progress smoothly and allows for good game flow. I realize that sometimes it is difficult to answer without actually "seeing" the play.

I may not have presented this the way I should have and I apologize if you feel I've wasted anyone's time. In any case, thanks for the input.

You said in the first thread that you were using this as a training tool. So your point seemed obvious to me. You've heard about a "patient whistle" and wanted to know more about what that meant. You asked open-ended questions that were a little vague and had some sub-text. You heard answers to some of the sub-text questions -- answers that included descriptions and definitions of the buzz-word you were trying to understand. I think you did very well, indeed!

Don't crawl into your shell. I was just yankin' your chain. Note the :D at the top of my reply to Chris.

But to make a point, you made it a point to write "B-2 is out of the visual field of A-1 (he doesn't have eyes behind his head)." As I said earlier, that doesn't have anything to do with whether there's a foul or not.

You scenarios just seemed more concerned with whether the plays were a foul or not, than it using a patient whistle.

JMHO

No shell here. If I had a shell, I'd be a soft shell crab. The reason why I put that statement into my play was

Rule 4-27-5 Incidental contact - If, however a player approaches an opponent from behind or from a position from whic 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.

What does that rule have to do with your statement regarding whether there's a foul or not? Am I misinterpreting it?

Tony had temporarily overlooked that reference. Usually, being behind the dribbler is considered only when the topic is screening. Does the reference you cite have any case plays related to it? THose might be interesting...

I never use a "patient whistle". They have too many germs on them.

Not true, juules. 4-27-5 is saying the same thing that I stated. The player coming from behind is the player in the unfavorable position. He/she is responsible for the contact if any occurs. Such contact is not considered incidental. If the contact causes A1 to lose the ball, it's a foul. No consideration is given to B1, just because A1 doesn't see him.

In the future perhaps using examples of plays where a patient whistle is more of a factor would be better.

Contact at half court with numbers for team A.

Contact on the dribbler driving to the basket.

Contact on the passer.

Contact on the over the top entry pass.;)