This is part of conversation from a previous thread and I'd like you guys' opinion: A1 has the ball and makes play to the hole. He leaves his feet to shoot (actually, he doesn't have to leave his feet...it's your choice). Before contact is made, B1 begins to flop. Contact is made, A1 splits B1 right down the breast bone. Both players end up on the floor. Shouldn't this be an automatic blocking foul? Didn't B1 lose his "legal guarding position" status when he began his flop? Other posters mentioned that they don't call a charge or a block on this, due to the flop.

For me this one has to be seen. Depending on the severity of the contact, I'll either no call it and tell the kid to stay in and take the contact, call the block if the kid is obviously taking a dive (or if it's really bad, by rule it's a T), or finally, if it's clear that the offensive player is out of control and really creating the contact, I'll call the PC. Sorry it's not a specific answer, but for me, I'd really have to see the play.

B1 does not lose LGP when he leans back.

Does B1 have legal guarding position? Was B1 fouled? If so, you have a PC foul. If not, we play on. There's no loss of guarding position by moving backwards, which is where I would believe one would move when "flopping."

Now, if he flops, stays on the floor, and someone trips over him, then you have an easy blocking call.

I would have a hard time visualizing a play where a "flop" caused contact and created a disadvantage for a driving A1. If it did, then you have your choice of a personal foul or technical foul. I would probably lean toward the former and warn everyone in the FT lane before shooting about the latter.

[/B][/QUOTE]

B1 does not lose LGP when he leans back. [/B][/QUOTE]


I understand that. I am talking the motion of flopping, not just absorbing the blow, or anticipating the blow.

B1 does not lose LGP when he leans back. [/B][/QUOTE]


I understand that. I am talking the motion of flopping, not just absorbing the blow, or anticipating the blow. [/B][/QUOTE]

Isn't flopping leaning back?

That is one of my questions? Does B1 have legal guarding position. By flopping, regardless of how clear it may be, does B1 lose his legal guarding position? If he doesn't, at what time in the flop does he lose it? Ergo my question: is an attempt (no matter how minor or major an attempt) at flopping a guaranteed blocking foul?

I understand that. I am talking the motion of flopping, not just absorbing the blow, or anticipating the blow. [/B][/QUOTE]

Isn't flopping leaning back? [/B][/QUOTE]


Yes, but the natural conclusion to your post (if you mean it this way) is that you can get a technical foul for flopping while remaining in a legal guarding position. May I assume that?

Isn't flopping leaning back? [/B][/QUOTE]


Yes, but the natural conclusion to your post (if you mean it this way) is that you can get a technical foul for flopping while remaining in a legal guarding position. May I assume that? [/B][/QUOTE]

No. I've never given a T for flopping, never will.

My point is if B1 has LGP, leans back & gets smushed into a huge bloodstain in the gym floor by A1 this is not a block.

It's a PC or nothing. If you need to call something call the PC.

Last year our "esteemed" VHSL Rules Interpreter insisted, at our state rules clinic, that we call a T on every flop. Her credibility went from "shaky" to non-existent. There's enough trouble officiating as it is without going lookin' for it!

Remember,
 

I'm just trying to learn from you guys. So, if I am a new ref working with you, I would be advised to ignore flops if the player is in LGP?

No one is saying to ignore the flop for the PC foul. You either have a T for the flop, a no call or a PC. Do not call a block for the contact initiated by the offensive player even if the defender has flopped. Most of these are going to be no calls. Some officials use the palm facing up motion to indicate get up off your butt, I'm not calling a PC because you flopped.

Are you sure?

My original question was
 

Does a defensive player still have LGP if he is flopping? That was my original question. And, if he does, when does he lose his LGP as his body moves towards the floor, only when he leaves his feet? This would imply he could be almost on his back and still have LGP.

[Edited by lmeadski on Dec 30th, 2005 at 07:43 PM]

Dan does not believe flopping exists.

To answer your question, does B1 need to get killed to draw a charge?

No.

If you judge the bail out was trying to keep from getting killed, and that contact by A1, that results in the train wreck was still through B1, call the charge.

If you judge it as that little belly forward, fly back, before contact...that Dan feels never occurs...and A1 goes down after, call the block.

We get paid for judgment, there is no clear cut, cookie cutter rule to apply, we have to see the play and make a call.

Sometimes the best call is the one we don't make.;)

100% positive.

I have enough confidence in my ability to talk some bonehead out of flopping twice that I don't need to T him up.

Of course I do, try not to be so tedious.

Tedious would be doing a search and posting links to all the examples of you arguing about no flops.

So either you just love being an arse and arguing or you really don't think there is such a thing as flopping, which is it?

I think we all know the answer.:rolleyes:

Except that's not what she said.

I think we all don't care what you think.

Re: Remember,
 

A "flop" is <b>faking</b> being fouled. That's why it's a "T" under Rule 10-3-7(f).

Maybe this will help- the description of "flopping" from a POE in last year's rule book:

<b>FLOPPING:</b>
<i>The defensive player or screener acting as though he or she has been charged by an opponent, when in fact he or she has not been...The 'actor' wants to create the false impression that he or she has been fouled in the charging/guarding situation, or while he or she is screening when in either case there is <b>no contact or incidental contact</b>. The 'actor' falls to the floor as though he or she was knocked down by the force of the contact. These actions are designed to have a foul charged to the opponents- a foul not deserved.</i>

Iow, if it's a "flop' by the defender, there is very little or <b>no</b> actual contact involved. The defender is faking it all the way.

If there is an appreciable amount of contact, that's when you have to worry about LGP,etc. to make either a block or charge call.

Hope that helps.

Personally, if a defender flops on me, I'll whisper in his ear to cut that sh!t out because he's making me look bad. I might mention it to his coach too if it's an Oscar quality flop. Please don't do what I did once though. A coach hollered at me after one of his kids flopped "What do you call that?" I hollered back "The judge from France gives him 9.7". Just slipped out. Not as good idea to make smart remarks like that unless you're prepared to listen to 'em coming back at ya.

Gee, I think I'll keep chipping in anyway with quality posts.

Why not reply with that picture of the squirrel, and your other usual informative postings?:rolleyes:

That's it, eh?

Great...enjoy yourself junior.

Re: Re: Remember,
 

[QUOTE

Iow, if it's a "flop' by the defender, there is very little or <b>no</b> actual contact involved. The defender is faking it all the way.

If there is an appreciable amount of contact, that's when you have to worry about LGP,etc. to make either a block or charge call.



[/B][/QUOTE]


Thanks, JR. Let me twist the knife a bit further: There can be a appreciable amount of contact as the player is flopping (defender wouldn't be taking the dive if someone wasn't bearing down on him or her). We all know that. You mention if there IS alot of contact, then you have to worry about LGP.

Back to my original question: at what point in the flop does the defender lose his LGP? When he hits the floor? At 74.6 degrees from perpendicular to the floor? At some point in the flop the defender must lose LGP, or he/she would be able to maintain LGP while laying on the floor. Or, as the rule states, are all flops fouls?

[Edited by lmeadski on Dec 30th, 2005 at 10:09 PM]

Re: Re: Re: Remember,
 

Thanks, JR. Let me twist the knife a bit further: There can be a appreciable amount of contact as the player is flopping (they wouldn't be taking the dive if someone wasn't bearing down on them). We all know that. You mention if there IS alot of contact, then you have to worry about LGP.

Back to my original question: at what point in the flop does the defender lose his LGP? When he hits the floor? At 74.6 degrees from perpendicular to the floor? At some point in the flop the defender loses LGP. Or, as the rule states, all flops are fouls. I just wonder how the pros rationalize this?
[/B][/QUOTE]

B1 does not lose LGP when he leans back.

Ever.

Re: Dan, you are missing my question
 

Falling to the floor is legal.

Unless your opponent trips over you, but that's another thread.

(Of course you don't believe what you just wrote...re-read your prior post.)

Dan
 

if the defender leans back all the way to the floor (a real long lean, sometimes referred to as falling), the defender still has LGP?

Re: Dan
 

If A1 charges into him as he's leaning he has lgp.

If A1 (or any A) trips over him after he hits the floor he's guilty of blocking.

Re: Re: Dan
 

Dont mean to cut this so thin, but, if the defender has not hit the floor yet, but is virtually down (15 degrees from the floor, lets say), and A runs into him and goes to the floor, it is a foul on A? Really?

Re: Re: Re: Remember,
 

Thanks, JR. Let me twist the knife a bit further: There can be a appreciable amount of contact as the player is flopping (defender wouldn't be taking the dive if someone wasn't bearing down on him or her). We all know that. You mention if there IS alot of contact, then you have to worry about LGP.

Back to my original question: at what point in the flop does the defender lose his LGP? When he hits the floor? At 74.6 degrees from perpendicular to the floor? At some point in the flop the defender must lose LGP, or he/she would be able to maintain LGP while laying on the floor. Or, as the rule states, are all flops fouls?

[Edited by lmeadski on Dec 30th, 2005 at 10:09 PM] [/B][/QUOTE]

Like I said before, there really is no cut and dried answer to that question.

If during that bail out move B1's lower body moves toward A1 that means movement toward the opponent at the point of contact, thus no LGP and a block.

If you are talking flat out taking a Nestea plunge to the floor, I've been known to call any contact after the flop a block at that point.

The best advice I can give you is find the defender, judge LGP and look for contact through the defender.

Re: Re: Re: Dan
 

Well, let's take a step back and analyse your play.

A1 drives the lane.

Defender B1 leans back (some would say flop) just before A1 makes contact to draw the charge. A1 continues driving the lane & makes contact with B1 as B1 is 15 deg from the floor.

Analysis:

B1 would have to propel himself to the floor pretty damn quickly to be 15 deg off the floor when A1 makes contact. Since I do not allow players to play with a jetpack on their chest I've never seen such a thing. Really.

Re: Dan
 

Look for a limbo stick....

Thanks BZ
 

I guess what I was really looking for was a definition of LGP as it relates to flopping. I made a no call on a flop where, had the D held his ground, i would have called the charge. But, the kid starts to take a dive, A makes contact (the defender is almost halfway to the ground when the collision happens). However, the defender's feet are still on the ground, just not underneath him anymore. Both kids end up on the floor, both coaches are on my butt like a wild hair.

Re: Re: Dan
 

To go just a little further on what Dan said, the defender after establishing LGP is allowed to protect himself from a charge. Check out rule 4-23-3(e)-"After the initial legal guarding position is obtained, the guard may turn or duck to absorb the shock of imminent contact".

- little or no contact-- it's a flop and either a no-call or a "T".
- no contact and the defender flops, and then the airborne shooter comes back down and trips over the defender---block.
- LGP by the defender before the shooter leaves his feet-- it's a charge if there's significant contact even though the defender leans back, ducks, etc. to protect himself.
- No LGP when the shooter leaves his feet, or LGP but the defender then moves towards the shooter after he's airborne--it's a block.

Re: Thanks BZ
 

One guy who taught my referee class said,"If the guy has his chin up in the air while going backwards, it is most likely a flop."

Why not reply with that picture of the squirrel, and your other usual informative postings?:rolleyes: [/B][/QUOTE]Uh, no, that would be me posting that picture along with my informative-rolleyes- postings.
http://www.sodamnfunny.com/Picture/Animal/photo7.jpg

The picture adds more value to this forum than the endless, pointless flame wars you delight in starting with other posters imo.

Of course, that jmo. Feel free to reply. I won't be doing so any further than this. Waste of time.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Dan
 

C'mon, you said 15 deg off the floor. That is exactly what you said. You were not even clever enough to clip it from your post here.

Peddle your horsesh1t elsewhere troll.

Re: Re: Re: Dan
 

Thanks, JR, i am aware that defenders have a right to defend themselves. It is obvious when a player is defending himself vs. flopping to the ground. Just trying to work this through my thick brain. And, i think the answer I am looking for might end up just being a judgment call.

Re: Thanks BZ
 

It's a flop if you judge it to be faking to get a foul.

The complete dive is easy to call, they are falling before A1 gets near them, they convulse, throw back their arms, and stupidly yell out...the only sound that should be coming out if you'd been drilled in the chest is ooofff...and they fall.

No LGP, worst case...by rule...it's a T, in practice it's a no-call if they don't contact someone by doing it, and a block if they do.

In all cases they get a knock that stuff off.

The rest is like I said, LGP and contact through the defender.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Dan
 

And, i think the answer I am looking for might end up just being a judgment call. [/B][/QUOTE]Yup, it's always a judgement call on whether it's a flop or not. If it isn't a flop, then you have to determine whether the right call is a block or a charge- <b>if</b> the contact warrants a call (which is another judgement call).

It'll come with experience, believe it or not. Experience is a better teacher than any of us usually are.

Dan
 

Take a pamprin! My original post never mentioned a degree at impact. I later posted this:

[/B][/QUOTE]

Dont mean to cut this so thin, but, if the defender has not hit the floor yet, but is virtually down (15 degrees from the floor, lets say), and A runs into him and goes to the floor, it is a foul on A? Really? [/B][/QUOTE]

Couldn't you infer that that was meant to be an example? Maybe the confusion was "from", I didn't mean 15 degrees off the floor (how can one be degrees off the floor?), I meant the defenders body was at a 15 degree angle from the floor, feet still on the hardwood. And, by the way, we don't mind being called Trolls (if you were trying to hurt my feelings or something...).

[Edited by lmeadski on Dec 31st, 2005 at 08:48 AM]

Uh, no, that would be me posting that picture along with my informative-rolleyes- postings.
http://www.sodamnfunny.com/Picture/Animal/photo7.jpg

The picture adds more value to this forum than the endless, pointless flame wars you delight in starting with other posters imo.

Of course, that jmo. Feel free to reply. I won't be doing so any further than this. Waste of time. [/B][/QUOTE]

Yeah, I'm the caustic one picking all the fights.

You have bigger ones than the squirrel if you expect anyone to buy that BS.

Thanks again JR
 

I appreciate the commentary. I was fishing for a ruling on whether or not LGP was lost as a defender was flopping, which would make these calls a bit easier to process.

Re: Dan
 

Dont mean to cut this so thin, but, if the defender has not hit the floor yet, but is virtually down (15 degrees from the floor, lets say), and A runs into him and goes to the floor, it is a foul on A? Really? [/B][/QUOTE]

Couldn't you infer that that was meant to be an example? And, by the way, we don't mind being called Trolls (if you were trying to hurt my feelings or something...). [/B][/QUOTE]

Ahhh...the royal we. Nice touch.

By the way Your Higness, I didn't mean to insult you by calling you a troll. If I meant to insult you I would have called you an @sshole. But you're entirely too dull to be an @sshole. You're merely a troll.

Anyway, have a good life. Your Highness.

But that is what my wife calls me...
 

That's not even an insult anymore, its kind of subtle foreplay.

I am sure Oatmeal queen will relish reading this thread!

Dan, have a good New Year.

Boy
 

this is a touchy crowd tonight. I thought only coaches got emotional about basketball.

I believe as the POE tried to convey that flopping has no place on a basketball court. Officials rely on visual evidence in order to determine what fouls and violations to call. If the players begin to purposely create fake visual evidence in order to unduly influence the officials decision then the sport will go down a road we do not want it to go.

Most seasoned officials will not be fooled with most flops. But what about less experienced ones? Their job is difficult enough without allowing the players to actively try and gain an undue advantage by creating a false impression.

So IMO, I try to eliminate flops by telling the flopper or their coach to never do that again or if the act warrants it in my opinion to call the T.

Re: Re: Dan
 

Couldn't you infer that that was meant to be an example? And, by the way, we don't mind being called Trolls (if you were trying to hurt my feelings or something...). [/B][/QUOTE]

Ahhh...the royal we. Nice touch.

By the way Your Higness, I didn't mean to insult you by calling you a troll. If I meant to insult you I would have called you an @sshole. But you're entirely too dull to be an @sshole. You're merely a troll.

Anyway, have a good life. Your Highness. [/B][/QUOTE]

Sheez, Dan,and Jurassic, how does he rate? When I push a question to the point of absurdity, you just tell me to quit thinking so much. This guy gets the insult, the squirrel, and all the flame war preliminaries except Jeff saying he's being mis-quoted. What do I have to do to climb into these exalted ranks?

This very question (debate) is the reason this place is becoming more and more irrelevant.

Officiating is not always about rules and the letter of the rules. Officiating is also about philosophy and the practices of the people you officiate around. I personally do not care what anyone else here does about this or many other officiating issues. I do not have to answer to anyone here.

Peace

Re: Re: Re: Dan
 

Sheez, Dan,and Jurassic, how does he rate? When I push a question to the point of absurdity, you just tell me to quit thinking so much. This guy gets the insult, the squirrel, and all the flame war preliminaries except Jeff saying he's being mis-quoted. What do I have to do to climb into these exalted ranks? [/B][/QUOTE]Sorry, it's a "guy" thing. You flunked the physical.

Hey, sorry y'all
 

if i pushed this past the point of absurdity. I just was looking for an answer to a simple question (I should have stated it better when I first posted, would have save alot of the flaming). But, isn't this the place for us to hammer out the details of our trade/avocation?

Re: Hey, sorry y'all
 

It is to a point. At some point you have to realize that what you think is only about you. Other individuals might have a different point of view and they will not change because you think your way of thinking is better. I know there is not much I have read here that has changed my way of thinking just because someone else though it was a good idea. Most of my officiating philosophies have been shaped by what I have learned from the people I have seen around me or have talked to at camp. So if you want to call Ts for floping, go right ahead. I know I will not do that they way you suggest. It also does not matter how you interpret the rule either. I will not have to work with you to have this debate.

Peace

Re: Hey, sorry y'all
 

Yea, it is. And some of us whose minds run like yours (asking lots of weird questions is our way of probing and understanding an issue) haven't been disturbed by your "absurdity". But in general, only socratic questioning is practiced, and when a "student" (ie someone who doesn't understand something) uses "explorational inquiry", JR and Dan can get a little crusty. There are a couple of others who respond this way, but they're not on here quite as much. Rutledge can sound crusty sometimes, but it's just a ruse. He's just enjoys a good argument.

I, for one, appreciate your concern for the game, and your interest in nailing down the details. It's good for all of us to shine the flashlight into the nooks and crannies of the rules, and see what's hiding in there.

Don't worry. If you crack a good locker room joke, and tell them to "Shut up" a couple times, you'll find yourself fitting right in. Also, the current acceptable expletive on this board is "Bruce" as in, "You're being a Bruce-head" and "We got Bruced".

Re: Re: Re: Dan
 

I would say that at this point, we're beyond the laws of verticality. However, if you are watching the D and trying to decide who caused the contact it would have to be A's foul. (at least in this play)

Wow, I posted without reading to the end of the stitch. I didn't realize that the topic had changed. Sorry for interrupting, carry on...............

A flop with no contact is a T. A flop with contact is either a block (if no LGP) or absorbing the contact (no call is possible or PCF if B has LGP).

Re: Re: Hey, sorry y'all
 

Juulie,

There is a difference between a good friendly debate as compared to all the comments that has gone on in this post about an issue that is never going to change the minds of officials on this issue. This very issue been discussed several times (and will continue to be debated) and I know I have never changed my mind once because someone said something differently on this topic or many other topics for that matter. So it is good to debate many things from time to time. It is also good to put the debate in perspective.

Peace

Re: Re: Re: Hey, sorry y'all
 

Yup. I'm just trying to keep lmeadski here, so he doesn't get mad and leave. I like haearing other people who learn this way. I'm not the only one who instinctively says, "Yea, but..."

Also very true. Good to debate, good to keep perspective. Now, Jeff, you do realize, don't you, that with this kind of sensible down-to-earth language, you'll never qualify as a speaker at a ref camp? :D You need to be a lot more verbose and high-falutin'...

My position on this whole thing
 

is that I DIDN"T call a T for the infraction (not that I wouldn't if the situation warranted but have yet to T up a flopper). In fact, I didn't call anything! I have called my share of blocks and charges (haven't seen a blarge yet, tho). I just keep replaying the play in my mind wondering what I might do differently next time. That's when I came upon the thought of LGP and flopping and how they inter-relate (esp a defender who is IN LGP and then feels compelled to flop anyway). I love this site, I have learned alot and will continue to.

[Edited by lmeadski on Dec 31st, 2005 at 11:27 AM]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Hey, sorry y'all
 

Juulie,

If I listen to people on this site I would have never done anything. That is just another reason why people need to keep things into perspective as to what someone says about anyone or any issue here.

Peace

Actually Crusty #1 and Crusty #2 got into it with blindzebra, who can hardly be called a "student". If you'll take the time and go back and re-read this thresd, Juulie, I think that you'll find that Crusty #1 and Crusty #2 actually tried very hard to be helpful to the "student"- 1meadski. I know that I looked and I can't find an instance in this thread where I got <b>crusty</b> with the "student"-1meadski.

I also can't talk for Crusty #2 at any time either, contrary to some people's opinion. To do so would make Crusty #2...well...crusty.

Re: Dan
 

I'm not sure that this question ever got answered amongst the insults and requests for the squirrel picture, but the general answer is yes, as long as nothing in 4-23-3 was violated.

Isn't flopping leaning back? [/B][/QUOTE]


Yes, but the natural conclusion to your post (if you mean it this way) is that you can get a technical foul for flopping while remaining in a legal guarding position. May I assume that? [/B][/QUOTE]

If B1 takes it in the chest, then they haven't faked being fouled! They may have embellished a bit, but they didn't fake it.

Okay, well I just skimmed through, and didn't really get down to details. Saw the squirrel picture, saw the flames, saw the thing about 15% (but, I see now that that's Crusty #2). My apologies to Crusty #1. I acknowledge your infinite patience and solicitude to the humble petitioners, and your righteous indignation to the arrogant and petulant.

(cute little smilie here, bowing and scraping).

Re: Re: Dan
 

Actually, I answered it twice. Here's what I said, tucked in there amongst the requests for squirrel pictures:

"B1 does not lose LGP when he leans back."

I bailed out when the discussion devolved into exactly how many degrees off the floor B1 must be for this to still apply.

And btw Juulie, please refrain from explaining the thinking behind my posts or apologizing for them.

Have a happy new year.

If B1 flops, and there is contact, how do you judge this to be a foul?

IOW, how can you judge displacement if B1 flops?

Just because there's contact, it doesn't mean a foul has occurred.

[Edited by BktBallRef on Dec 31st, 2005 at 07:07 PM]

Re: Re: Dan
 

I went back and re-read 4.23.3. According to that, it does seem that a player can have LGP even if he is falling to the floor. However, the rule on flopping (10.3.7.F) makes it clear that flopping is a T (which most feel is an unwarranted call, myself included, in most cases). I see this in my head better than I can explain, sorry: A1 is in LGP. In anticipation of contact with dribbler B1, A1 begins a flop (not protecting, flopping). As A1 is on his/her way to the floor, B1 finally makes contact with A1 and trips over the almost prone defender (remember, A1 is not on the floor yet). From what I am hearing, the concensus is foul on B1 for charging into A1, who is still in a LGP. Got it.

[Edited by lmeadski on Dec 31st, 2005 at 07:35 PM]

Re: Re: Re: Dan
 

First off A1 is always on offense when you present a play.;)

Second, B1 is allowed to turn or duck to absorb contact, that is COMPLETELY different than bailing out, doing the limbo, or selling contact that has not yet occurred.

If that lean is not for self protection, no way am I calling a charge when contact occurs AFTER B1 is going down.

It's a no call or a block.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Dan
 

I agree. As I said, how can we judge displacement if the defender flops? In my mind, I don't see how there can be displacement if the defender is already flopping before contact.

Sorry, Im player dyslexic
 

I will work on my A's and B's when presenting. Sorry

Re: Re: Re: Dan
 

Well, I don't know where you got a consensus from but I don't have a foul on A1. It's not a foul to trip over another player.

:confused:

You're overthinking, my friend. Don't call a rule book foul. Call what your head and your gut tells you to call.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Dan
 

Agreed!! After i get things worked through in my noggin, then I can make a reaction call vs thinking about it. I think i do have it clear in my mind how I will handle this in the future. You all have been a great help, as always.

Just because B1 starts to flop doesn't mean a charge sitll can't happen. If A1 still plows over B1 even if B1 has started to fade away, it is still a charge. B1's flop can only lessen the contact, not increase it. If there is still enough contact for a foul, why permit A1 to get away with it just because B1 was trying to sell it to us.

Even if B1 starts to flop, I'll still call a charge if a charge occurs.

Camron, a foul is in the eye of the beholder. Just like some officials won't call a charge if the defender is under the basket, I'm not calling one if the defender is flopping and there's no displacement. To each his own.

[Edited by BktBallRef on Jan 1st, 2006 at 03:30 PM]

No displacement, I agree....nothing to call.

Notice that I said "plows over"...which I meant to imply substantial displacing contact.

There are those who will refuse to call a foul just because B1 was trying/starting to flop in spite of substantial displacement.

I won't, I'll just call a block and then tell B1 to stop flopping.

How can you justify that? B1 was in LGP falling away from the shooter who then crushed B1. I could almost stomach a no call...but a block? In what way did B1 commit a blocking foul?

I have seen small guards who start to lean backwards when they are about to get plowed by a 6'6" center who is about the size of a bull elephant. Who can blame them? If the defender gets plowed by the offensive player, it's <i>still</i> a charge even if the defender is starting to give ground. A player can give ground, or even turn, when contact is imminent but that does not shift responsibility for who created the contact.

Z

There's a big difference in leaning and flopping.

Actually, I think a flop in NFHS (the technical that they wanted us to call) means going to the floor with no contact. In that case, it would be impossible for the offensive player to plow the defender. So I would assume that this post refers to leaning backwards (giving ground before contact).

Z

I don't disagree, Z. My point is that I think each of us would probably make similiar calls, looking at the same plays. It's just that when we start using terms like "plowing over," "leaning," and "flopping," we each visualize it differently. But I'm also saying that if he's flopping or leaning, displacement may not be possible or able to be judged. That's why I "lean" toward a no-call (no pun intended).

Agreed. Sometimes discussion forums are a real poor replacement for video. Cumbaya. :)

Z

I'm not talking about a play where B1 leans back and A1 puts him in the second row. I'm talking about the play where B1 starts falling to the ground and grunts well before A1 even gets there.

That's like bailing out some guy out of control in the lane who ends up on the floor. No call.