Would you have gone and got it....

[ronny mulkey]

Boys AA State Quarterfinals. One team has clawed their way back from 15 down to within 5 with about 3 minutes to go. Endline throwin beneath basket. Big post player is fronted and defended from behind. Lob throwin about 8 to 10 feet out from the endline and post player with minimal contact pushes off to receive the inbound pass. I am at C with no players at all in the lane. The play is just outside the lane opposite lane from me. I see the play and wait a beat for either partner but no whistle. Of course, by the time I cut down on the whistle the player is just standing there holding the ball. My question is: Would you have reached over there to get this call?

1. play is across the lane
2. contact is minimal
3. the reason the player received the ball was because of the contact
4. it was the post player's 5th foul
5. it as a great game and atmosphere

[ChuckElias]

I'm probably not reaching for minimal/marginal contact unless I'm trying to make a point. In your sitch, I probably would let the Lead and Trail handle it, unless it was OBVIOUS that the minimal contact freed him up.

[South GA BBall Ref]

Mulk:

With minimal contact, I would not have "reached" to get it. My philosophy is that I would only reach to get those "train wrecks" that for some reason did not get called. The only question I would have is: "Had the crew allowed the minimal contact throughout the game?" If so, let it go.

[ronny mulkey]

Dre,

We had a lot of contact in this game but to me, it is all about advantage/disadvantage and not so much the degree of the contact. I was trying to point out that an advantage was gained - he would not have gotten the ball without this slight contact. Your answer, and Chuck's answer, may still be the same, but change the question to: would you reach if you saw an advantage gained?

But, I did reach and I don't feel good about that. I was torn between letting it go or fighting my conscious. Email me: [email protected] and let me know how your games went.

Mulk

[FrankHtown]

In camp, we were instructed as C with nothing going on in your area, to take a step or two onto the court and help out with those kinds of plays. The T or L may be straight-lined and can't see the contact. The C, by coming on to the court a step or two, makes it not as much of a "reach"...making it easier to sell the call.

Did the post player gain an advantage? It appeared to you that he did.

[IREFU2]

Originally posted by ronny mulkey
Dre,

We had a lot of contact in this game but to me, it is all about advantage/disadvantage and not so much the degree of the contact. I was trying to point out that an advantage was gained - he would not have gotten the ball without this slight contact. Your answer, and Chuck's answer, may still be the same, but change the question to: would you reach if you saw an advantage gained?

But, I did reach and I don't feel good about that. I was torn between letting it go or fighting my conscious. Email me: [email protected] and let me know how your games went.

Mulk

If you felt an advantage was gained or the other player was put at a disadvantage, make the call.

[Snake~eyes]

Originally posted by ronny mulkey
1. play is across the lane
2. contact is minimal
3. the reason the player received the ball was because of the contact
4. it was the post player's 5th foul
5. it as a great game and atmosphere

One and two are enough for me to not get the call. Four and five are irrelevant.


Could you live with a no call?


As they say, let the crew live and die with the call.

[bob jenkins]

I'm going to disagree with most of the others and say that you should have made the call. If there's no one in your area, you need to find the next competitive matchup.

As I visualize the play, L was busy with the inbounder and the defender, T had the other players on that side of the court -- you had the best view of any "north and south" pushing across the lane.

[BktBallRef]

If the contact is worthy of a foul, I go get it. If it's not, then I try not to. It sounds like this is one you wish you had passed on and I understand, as we've all made such calls.

For the past two weeks, we've taken to the floor with the mindset of "Let's let them play until they show us that they can't." As a result, most games have had good flow, very few DQs, and some good basketball. OTOH, I've seen games before and after mine where the officials simply dominated the games. I heard one official tell his crew that he wasn't happy with himself and the first half. I don't think his partners picked up on what he was saying.

If this had happened in one of the games I've worked in the past two weeks, it's one that we would have all three passed on.

[Rick82358]

Did the call fit the game?
Did he gain an advantage?

From the way you wrote about it the no call was probably a good thing.

If you go get that call it had better be pretty solid could you justify the call if your supervisor questioned you on it while looking at the tape?

[JRutledge]

Minimal contact should not be the issue. What was called in the game ultimately should not be the issue. If the "minimal contact" caused a clear advantage, then you got a foul. That is what the C is there for. If you saw the entire play, then I have no problem with the call. The only time I would be worried about what my partner saw is if I did not see the entire play.

Peace

[psycho_ref]

I am a big believer that we should cover bodies (to an extent). Your area of coverage doesn't mean anything if there is noone in it. Does this mean that one partner could be responsible for 5 matchups, and you say "sorry it wasn't in my area of coverage"? That doesn't make any sense. You cover areas when its a balanced floor, otherwise you get the closest matchups.

As for the call, only you can decide whether it should have been called or not. Would you have called it if IT WAS your area of coverage? Don't answer that. And don't lose sleep over the "fifth foul", I am sure the first 4 had some merit, (I hope). Did you ask your partners? They would have the best input.