No-call train wreck?

[assignmentmaker]

Originally posted by mplagrow
Glad I was working the table and not officiating this one. A1 is going for the drive from the elbow. B1 is standing in LGP at the block, ready to take the charge. A1 looks like he's going to drive through and everyone cringes for the train wreck. At the last second, A1 tries to pull up and shoot over the top. However, he loses control of the ball as he jumps. His hands go up for the shot with no ball. The ball gets trapped between A1's stomach and B1's chest. A1's momentum pushes the ball into B1, who falls backward. A1 falls on top of him with the ball still inbetween.

It looked terrible. It looked like A1 clobbered B1, but from the side it was pretty clear that the loose ball was a buffer between the two for pretty much the whole play. The ref had nothing. Finally, A1 grabbed the ball and rolled over, and it ended with a travel call.

Does anyone call an offensive foul on this? Obviously the whole gym was screaming for it, but A1 was not in control of the ball, which was pinned between the players as they went down.

If I understand your description rightly, A1 did not shoot the ball. Therefore Team A retained control and, if it was a common foul, it was a team control foul.

It's hard to believe that absolutely no part of A1 touched B1 during the entire crash . . . it there was ANY contact, that could make the matter of the interposition of the ball moot.

One might argue that B1 did not give an opponent-without-the-ball room to stop (time and distance), but A1 was a player-with-the-ball when B1 took a position, so . . . not a good argument, in my view.

[JugglingReferee]

I've got a charge - a team control foul.

[mplagrow]

Agreed, no PC foul without possession of the ball. I'm sure there was SOME contact, even though the ball was between them. Time and distance were not factors. B1 saw him coming and was set up, as I recall.

[mick]

Originally posted by JRutledge
I usually agree with Mick on just about everything, but I am going to have to agree with BZ on this one. The contact is not with the player, it is with the ball. I could see if the player purposely used the ball to hit the player, then I can go along with something being called, but it would not be a common foul. You would not call a foul on a player that throws the ball off a player as that player is falling out of bounds. Why would you call a foul in this situation?

Peace

C'mon now, Rut. Stay with me here.

Besides the first two items disallowed [eg., stuff with the hands (holds, and hacks) and stuff with the body (trips and blocks)] that rule says a player shouldn't "use any rough tactics" either.
Knocking a player to the floor with or without the ball is kinda rough, ain't it?

mick

[Ref Daddy]

What grade level was this event in? Looked and didn't see it.

Train wrecks are more "common(?)" at lower levels I feel. Players still trip routinely over their own feet or another team mate and might not deserve a call.

At JV and V level two players falling on top of each other - gotta whistle something more than likely.

I'm leaning towrd a charge. if the ball wasn't between them - wouldn't the same thing happen?

I like the comment about the throwing the ball off a defenders leg being no call - but I'd call if the player PUSHED the ball into the defender.

Interesting......

[mplagrow]

Sorry, didn't specify. 8th grade boys.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by mick

C'mon now, Rut. Stay with me here.

Besides the first two items disallowed [eg., stuff with the hands (holds, and hacks) and stuff with the body (trips and blocks)] that rule says a player shouldn't "use any rough tactics" either.
Knocking a player to the floor with or without the ball is kinda rough, ain't it?

mick

Mick, the way I read this play I got nuthin' also.

Ugly basketball can be legal.