One in a million over and back

[Mark Padgett]

I'm posting this just to show that you never know when an obscure play will happen and you'd better be prepared for it.

Last Saturday, JV boys level - A1 has ball in frontcourt and team A is set up fairly high, so my partner (trail) is standing in backcourt by about 2 feet. The gym floor is smaller than standard, so this is the correct position. A1 attempts a pass to A2. A2 moves just as the pass is thrown and the ball hits my partner (who is still in backcourt). The ball caroms back into the frontcourt where it is grabbed by A1.

From the lead, I knew this was an over and back. My partner (a 12 year vet) didn't blow his whistle. I decided to let it go, since I thought maybe he saw a member of B touch the pass in frontcourt or something.

At the quarter, I asked him about it. After giving me his best Homer Simpson look for a moment, he admitted he blew it.

We both recited the fourth element of an over and back, which is that the team that was last to touch in frontcourt is the first to touch after the ball has been in the backcourt, not that the touch has to be in the backcourt.

Of course, neither one of us blew another call the entire weekend.

For those of you who are newbies, the first three elements of an over and back are:

1) there must be team control
2) the ball must have achieved frontcourt status
3) the team in team control must be last to touch the ball in frontcourt

And, of course, number four is listed above. If you have all four elements, you have an over and back. If you are missing even one of them, you don't. And yes - there is an exception on throwins.

Originally posted by Mark Padgett


From the lead, I knew this was an over and back. My partner (a 12 year vet) didn't blow his whistle. I decided to let it go, since I thought maybe he saw a member of B touch the pass in frontcourt or something.

At the quarter, I asked him about it. After giving me his best Homer Simpson look for a moment, he admitted he blew it.

I would like to add my two cents on this. This is exactly how I would have handled this situation. Even though your partner later admitted to kicking the call, you didn't come charging from the baseline and make a scene. I've worked with too many prima donnas who think that they are bigger than the game and their partners. Besides even though the lead saw this it's not his "area" to call. Something to be learned in this forum every day.

[Danvrapp]

Originally posted by Suppref

...you didn't come charging from the baseline and make a scene. I've worked with too many prima donnas who think that they are bigger than the game and their partners. Besides even though the lead saw this it's not his "area" to call...

but I'd like to add yet two more cents to this discussion, albeit if off-topic. Where is the proverbial line drawn on taking a (non) call out of your primary. I totally agree in this situation, and I've had a few times this year (my first) where I was off ball and even then knew my partner just kicked a (non) call. However, and like Suppref says, I didn't want to thunder across the court and show my partner up. Is there ever a time when it would be acceptable and/or appropriate to make an out-of-your-primary call on a partner('s) no call?

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Danvrapp


...

but I'd like to add yet two more cents to this discussion, albeit if off-topic. Where is the proverbial line drawn on taking a (non) call out of your primary. I totally agree in this situation, and I've had a few times this year (my first) where I was off ball and even then knew my partner just kicked a (non) call. However, and like Suppref says, I didn't want to thunder across the court and show my partner up. Is there ever a time when it would be acceptable and/or appropriate to make an out-of-your-primary call on a partner('s) no call?

Dan, the further the call is out of my primary the surer
I have to be that it was missed and it would have to be
*very* obvious to everyone that the call needs to be made.
Not only that, I would need to have a very good reason to be
looking there to begin with.

[Mark Padgett]

Over the years, I've developed some guidelines I use for calling out of my area. The first thing I consider is the experience level of my partner and the type of league (summer, regular season, etc). Next would be the type of call.

If my partner is experienced, I probably won't call out of my area unless I see a kid get clobbered and also notice my partner was tying his shoe at the time.

I learned the hard way that most of the time you take a call away from you partner that was really his, he saw something that caused him to make the call (or non-call) the way he did. Plus - the more you call outside your area, it means the more you are looking outside you area and that's not your job.

Whenever I have a pregame, I always let my partner know I encourage and expect him to make an obvious call in my area if he is positive I blew it, but that I would expect it to be an "OHMYGOD". You know - the kind of foul where everyone in the gym goes "OHMYGOD".

BTW - speaking of areas, I did 4 games this past weekend with Juulie (rainmaker) and we only had one double whistle, and that was on a travel where the ball handler was moving from one area into the other. That's the way it's supposed to be.

[112448]

Mark

"BTW - speaking of areas, I did 4 games this past weekend with Juulie (rainmaker) and we only had one double whistle, and that was on a travel where the ball handler was moving from one area into the other. That's the way it's supposed to be."


In the above, you are refering to games officiated using 2-person mechanics, not 3, correct?

jake

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Mark Padgett
BTW - speaking of areas, I did 4 games this past weekend with Juulie (rainmaker) and we only had one double whistle, and that was on a travel where the ball handler was moving from one area into the other. That's the way it's supposed to be.

Mark -- Thanks for the compliment. Off-ball is something I've worked really hard on, and I appreciate you noticing. Incidentally, Slorey was quick to notice and compliment the same thing. I feel ten feet high.

On the subject of areas, and blown calls, I saw a real lulu in the WNBA game I was at this week. I have to say, that I thought the refs did a fantastic job. I didn't have any criticism at all, and they handled the player emotions really well, and the coaches. But there was a missed call that was one of Mark's OHMYGOSHs. In fact, the entire Coliseum gasped. The dribbler was in the center of the pack heading up court and the last offense player (I can't call her an "offender"!) was trying to hold off the defense. She set a good screen, and the fourth defender stepped around but the last defender didn't see the screen until it was too late and WOW! They both hit the deck! I saw the impact coming and glanced at both trail and center, but THEY WERE BOTH LOOKING DOWNCOURT toward the ball. I know the action -- it's very easy to ignore that last player or two behind you when the action is fast and furious. Unfortunately, the screen was a home team player so the reaction was huge -- and emotional. (I'm not going to put this onto McGriff's -- I don't want to hear what JF has to say!)

Here's the lesson: Even the most experienced, confident and capable refs do occasionally make mistakes -- even big ones. They did the right thing and shook it off and moved on. But I'm glad I wasn't at the film meeting the next day!!

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by rainmaker
The dribbler was in the center of the pack heading up court and the last offense player (I can't call her an "offender"!) was trying to hold off the defense. She set a good screen, and the fourth defender stepped around but the last defender didn't see the screen until it was too late and WOW! They both hit the deck!

If the defense didn't "run through" the pick, then this was a good no-call, at least under FED rules (yes, I know -- the WNBA rules might be different). 4-27-4.

[Barry C. Morris]

Unless I'm reading your post wrong, Rainmaker, the refs didn't miss a call here. If you're screened outside your visual field and make contact with a player that does not have the ball, it is considered incidental contact. Even though it looks ugly, it's not a foul.

Of course I'm using Fed rules here not NBA or WNBA.

[rockyroad]

Could you possibly give us a rule reference for your post? I'm not sure I am following your line of thought...just because the screen is set outside a player's field of vision does not give that player the right to mow down the screener. This should have been a foul at the Fed and NCAA level...the WNBA may have some clause which says to ignore that contact so far behind the play, but the Fed sure doesn't...also, to Juulie and to Mark Padgett, I see you have "crossed the river" and are working games in Vancouver now...I look forward to meeting you one of these weekends...

dj

[Hawks Coach]

I agree - incidental, and proably at all levels of play. Here is NF reference as requested:

Rule 4 SECTION 27 INCIDENTAL CONTACT
Incidental contact is contact with an opponent which is permitted and which does not constitute a foul.

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.

Rule 10-6-3d
In cases of screens outside the visual field, the opponent may make inadvertent contact with the screener and if the opponent is running rapidly, the contact may be severe. Such a case is to be ruled as incidental contact provided the opponent stops or attempts to stop on contact and moves around the screen, and provided the screener is not displaced if he or she has the ball.

Have to see the play, but if the defender does not see the screen and hits the screener hard, it is incidental. A lot of fans scream at incidental contact because it is so obvious tha something should be called. Not necessarily!

[Barry C. Morris]

My rule reference is the same as Bob's, 4-27-4. I am going under the inference that the player did not see the screen and plowed the screener over. Of course, it works both ways. A couple of years ago, I saw a player seemingly as big as a house set a screen on a guard that didn't see it. He was laid out flat when he hit it. His mother, who was sitting on the sideline about four feet from the play, wanted to call something but it's incidental contact.

[rockyroad]

Rule 10-6-3d says that the contact should be ruled incidental provided that the opponent stops or attempts to stop on contact...in the case mentioned, the defender didn't stop on contact, but mowed the screener down...so using the rationale posted above, A2 sets a screen for A1 who is dribbling in the frontcourt...B1, guarding A1, does not see the screen and runs through A2, knocking him/her to the floor. You will have a no-call on that play?

[Barry C. Morris]

Yes, I have a no call on that play. Of course I'm not talking about a case where a player runs into a screener, feels resistance, lowers his shoulder and plows on through. I'm talking about the situation where the momentum of the player knocks the screener down.

It is not always possible to stop on contact. Remember, Mass times Energy equals momentum.

If the player is not intending to knock down the screener he did not see, it is incidental contact.

[Hawks Coach]

Rockyroad has a good point regarding attempt to stop. Although you may flatten screener, if you never attempt to stop even after knocking the screener down, that should be a foul. If there is no foul and the defender can continue, defense gained advantage by running through the screener. That's why I said you have to see it. If the contact is hard and bodies go both ways (so defender is stopped by force of contact), it is incidental contact in my book. That frequently happens when a player doesn't see a screen. It is quite possible that there may is no way for a player to attempt to stop immediately on contact if the player is moving fast. But if that player never hesitates after plowing the screener, it's a foul.