Incidental contact
 

Have you ever NOT called a foul on the defense when a defender trips the opposing player dribbling the ball. I had a call recently where the offensive player (girls) was running down court and the defender was not really putting any pressure on her and their legs got tangled and the offensive player stumbled and lost possession. I passed on the potential foul, because I felt it was simply incidental contact. I was just wondering if any of you ever made an interpretation like this or do you automatically call that a foul on the defense.

If the defender did nothing but back up and move away from the defender, then I have no problem not calling anything. Now if the leg was stuck out (not necessarily on purpose) or the defender was not in legal guarding position, then I will likely call a foul on the defender.

Peace

-----------------------------------

You don't call a foul if there was no foul. You make decisions like this all the time in every game you work. Just because two players get tangled up or run into one another doesn't mean you have a foul. You have 10 people running hard on an 84' court. Incidental cantact is a fact of the game.

This is a foul on the defender. This is seeing the whole play though. I have no called it before, but only because i saw a player undoubtedly make a little contact with the defender and then seperated and once separated I saw the offensive player lose their feet out from underneath him/her on their own.

Regardless if you judge the contact with feet getting tangled up as incidental, this puts the offensive player at a distinct disadvantage. I don't want to say always because you have treat each play as an individual play. To say always would be wrong, but I will say personally I have this as a foul 99% of the time.

The philosophy of calling this a foul is used by mostly everybody in college and is very evident in the pro game.

I am not sure I agree with that statement. IF the offensive player is at a disadvantage, the question is why? If the offensive player was going into a defender that is couple be largely his/her problem. The offensive player still has a right to a place on the floor. And if 99% of the time you have a foul, then I would say that to be wrong.

Where did you get that? If anything I have been told to have a much slower whistle and not to bail out the offense when they make dumb plays. So I would take issue with you saying "most" in this case. All I have to do is watch a game on TV and I can see the most do not call this a foul on the defender (or anyone for that matter).

Peace

I mispoke, I should have said that in my region with college ball it is expressed that you call this a foul, and where I am from is where refs, for the most part are wanting to get into the pro game and therefore call this a foul like I do, cause this is what the pro game wants. (I bet if you think hard you will guess which part of the country I am talking about. It is also where about 70% of the NBA staff is from.)

Um, no, that statement is completely wrong imo; Anybody that called the play the way you are suggesting wouldn't be doing the college or pro game very long.

Incidental contact isn't necessarily a foul. <b>Illegal</b> contact is.

That's complete nonsense afaic.

You're trying to justify <b>your</b> own position by trying to say the the colleges and the NBA agree with your hypothesis. Well, that horse don't ride. They don't agree with you. Imo, if you call that foul <b>every</b> time, as you're suggesting, you'll never get a sniff of a D1 college game, let alone the NBA.

There is a big difference in the philosophy of this play at different levels. The NFHS has a case play stating that a defensive player lying on the floor should not be charged with a foul when an offensive player trips over him/her. The NCAA has an AR which makes the opposite ruling and states this is a blocking foul and that the defender does not have LGP. I have no clue what the NBA does nor do I care, but I would guess that like the rest of their game, they favor the offensive player.

The couple guys I know that work D1 have told me that they call a foul on the defender when the dribbler's feet get clipped by an opponent running nearby.

I'm just the messenger JR... don't point that cannon my way! :)

Even when the dribbler moves outa his path and runs/brushes into a defender who hasn't altered their straight-line path? Somehow, I really doubt your D1 friends would call that one on the defender. Not if they were any good anyway.:)

You'd really call a foul on a defender who was just standing there or moving in a straight-line path if a dribbler altered directions and then ran into them?

Forget LGP; each player is still entitled to a legal spot on the court.

You missed my point also, Nevada. You don't almost <b>always</b>(99%) call it on the defender. You call each situation individually depending on the circumstances. Sometimes it's incidental contact with no call; other times, the foul could be on <b>either</b> player.

It is a lot easier to sell this as a foul than to sell it as a no-call in my opinion. It might even help you the rest of the game so the defender isn't riding the ball handler up and down the court. Most times the defender doesn't have legal guarding position and is bodying up on the dribbler.

This is the same thing I hear from guys who work in the ACC. And when I attend camps where ACC refs are observing I always make that call. And I lean towards making that call in my JuCo games.

However, in my HS games I am more apt to pass on the play if I feel the defender did nothing wrong.

In the women's college game they want this called on the defense.

By the explanation of the poster, I would not have called it. Yet I can only imagine the defender was probably riding the offensive player and mostly likely the contact might have not been incidental. Yet keep in mind incidental contact if the offense was not put at a disadvantage. which in this case it sound like the offense lost the ball. I would have liked to see the play, Positioning as always means a lot. seeing from different angles will defenitely give you a better call.

I can't speak for them, but every indication that I've had from them makes me believe that, yes, the assignors and conference coordinators want the call made that way. What I would call isn't really an issue since I am not on the floor for any D1 games, but I guess if I got there, I would do as they wanted.

That is certainly true in the NFHS game, but as I wrote above it is NOT the case in the NCAA.

Again, I can't say for sure because I don't work that level of ball, but from what I hear 99% of the time that is the way those guys and gals call it up there. It doesn't really matter whether we agree with it or not. Certainly no one is consulting me!

We might need to make a distinction between Men's and Women's basketball. I know this is a sensitive issue for many, but there is a difference in many philosophies and contact is one of them. Having attended a couple of camps personally that D1 Men's assignors run, I do have a little insight on what they told us. I have never heard of this being a definite foul. I do remember officials being credited for not calling cheap foul calls on defensive players when they did not initiate contact.

I do not work that level either. I may one day have a shot, but only time will tell. From what I have learned in attending camps and working with D1 officials at HS camps, I have not heard any one say this needed to be called. Also, the OPer tried to suggest that a "certain part of the country" used this philosophy and have benefited and got to the NBA. Well that is not so true anymore. The system that was used in the ACC and SEC is no longer. Both conferences had completely different supervisors (because of some scandal in one case). So the NBA friendly mechanics and philosophies do not apply like they used to.

Peace

Rut,
My comment that you just quoted was in the context of a defender lying on the floor and the offensive player trips over him. It was about that specific play and the AR the NCAA provides for it stating that this is a blocking foul. That's all I was saying to JR there. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

I'd have to be there to see it, of course. But from the description I'd have to say I'd probably call it unless the offensive player initiated the contact. To me this seems like a pretty clear case of "call the obvious." I'd have to have a pretty good reason not to call this.

Well, I've been told the complete opposite, also including conversations with assignors and conference coordinators. They want each call to be decided on it's own merits, and it's <b>never</b> automatically <b>anything</b>.

Just gonna have to disagree on this one.

That's my understanding too.

Here is what I observed. the offensive player was dribbling up the right side of the court just entering the frontcourt. I was the trail coming up just behind the play. The defender was running alongside on the left and really not making a play on the ball when the their feet brushed together and the offensive player stumbled and lost the ball. I explained to the quite upset coach of the offense that it was incidental contact. He told me if the offensive player is tripped, it has to be a foul. I disagreed - he said I was clueless - his opponents got to shoot two foul shots.

I do agree with a previous poster who said its much easier to explain the foul than the no-call.

As noted here, the penalty for not calling this a foul is two shots and the ball at the division line. :D

Gentlemen I don't post here to argue, and I barely post to debate a topic, nor do I post anything that is my own personal opinion. Everything I post I have taken from some very high level officials, and I assume that to be the best you have to learn from the best and that is just what I am doing and trying to express here.

Jurassic Referee I understand what you are meaning in replying to my post. I believe you are saying that almost always is too much and that I'm saying that a trip or tangle of feet is always a foul. I am not saying that and I shouldn't have used 99% as how much I call this. I agree 100% with you about each play having its own merit and should be judged as such, but like someone said earlier it is a whole lot easier to sell a trip foul than to no call a trip foul. Are there going to be plays where two players are next to each other and the offensive player just trips themselves? Sure there are, and that is why you have to have a high level of concentration at all times.


MPLAHE,

From the play you described, I have a tripping foul. Don't try to think too hard into the defender having LGP and therefore leaving the onus on the dribbler. they are both side by side meaning that the offensive player has his head and shoulders past the defender. If the kids' feet get tangled up don't be afraid to blow the whistle. I would much rather go to the team of the defensive player's coach and tell him I blew it rather than going to the irate offensive team's coach and trying to sell him that I got the call right or even go over and tell him I missed it because he is going to tell you yeah he and everybody else saw that you missed it too. Whack!

1) Btaylor, saying that "very high level officials" agree with your personal stance is the oldest posting ploy in the world. Your philosophy/opinion should stand on it's merits, and imo this particular philosophy/opinion of your's is meritless- "very high level officials" notwithstanding. We disagree philosophically. It's that simple. Btw, I know a lot of "very high level officials" too. I slept in a Holiday Inn Express last night also. It's true, it's true.....:)

2) Personally, I really don't worry about selling anything. I worry about getting the call/no call <b>right</b>. If I know that I've made the right call, I could care less what any coach thinks of it. Any call that goes against their team is wrong from the git-go anyway. Jmo, but it might behoove you to stop worrying so much about what the coaches think when you make a call or ignore incidental contact. If you're looking for approval, you're in the wrong racket.

Again, jmo. Don't take it personally.

I may not agree with this next comment all the time, but my assoication wants us to make the call. If there is any contact and a player hits the floor from contact and it's not an accademy award move, meaning it was legitimate. Make the call. It's easier to sell than no call.

Did your association tell you to call it on the defender 99% of the time too?:confused:

As described, I have a foul on the defense in this play.

Regarding the percentages posted earlier -- I think that when this play happens in the "open court" it usually is a foul on the defense. When the offensive player drives to the hoop (especially when s/he's "out of control"), the likelihood of it being a foul goes down.

As stated many times on many different subjects, it may be a regional thing. I live in Virginia, the prominent ref's I run across work in the ACC. I have heard from more than one ACC ref that the play described by MPLAHE is expected to be called as a foul on the defender.

I'll never work in the ACC, however, all the camps I attend in hopes of one day breaking into D2 or D3 are heavily populated with ACC officials holding notepads, so when I'm in those camps, I'm going to make that call.

Sometimes players just trip with no contact. The coaches still want a foul called, lol.

I don't think it's automatic in either direction. A lot is going to depend on who is moving in which direction, and who can see whom. Thinking over various possibilities, I expect I'd call it more often than not at the high school level, but I can't say for sure from your description what I'd do in your case.

Of course not, it's who initiated the contact. many times at the High school level the offensive player is not always innocent. I'm not sure if that was a trick question or just being funny

Neither.

Just wondering if you had been instructed to <b>always</b> call that a foul on the defense too, no matter what the circumstances are or who initiated the contact.

They would prefer a call as long as it's legitimate.. as stated, only if there is contact then call it on who ever initiated it.

The correct call is a foul on B1 for this play. B1 didn't have LGP so is responsible for any contact that leads to an advantage.

BTW, I normally have a foul on a defender lying on the ground who inadvertently trips up an opponent with the ball.

Sometimes I'm a smart-@ss, but this is an honest question. How do we know whether B1 had LGP or not? The play doesn't tell us that. All the play says is that they were running side-by-side.

All you have to do to establish LGP is to have both feet on the floor and be facing your opponent. Once you've done that, you can move any direction (including straight up) and maintain that LGP. As long as B1 is not moving towards A1 when their feet tangle, B1 has done nothing wrong (assuming LGP was established -- two feet on the floor and facing A1 -- prior to the contact).

It may look ugly and clumsy, but if B1 established that LGP and isn't moving toward A1, you cannot (by rule) have a foul on B1.

Because the OP didn't say he had LGP, he just said B1 & A1 was running side by side. Just using the facts at hand.

Even if he HAD said B1 established LGP the way I envision this play is that A1 at some point had head & shoulders past B1.

Even if he HAD said B1 maintained LGP the way I envision this play B1 moved into A1.

So the only way B1 had LGP during the contact was that B1 established it, he didn't let A1 get head & shoulders past him & B1 did not move into A1 to initiate contact.

So what?

The dribbler getting his head and shoulders past a defender doesn't <b>automatically(99%)</b> mean that the foul is on the defender, does it?:confused:

The pertinent rule- NFHS 10-6-2 says <i>"If a dribbler, without contact, sufficiently passes an opponent to have head and shoulders in advance of that opponent, the <b>greater</b> responsibility for subsequent contact is on the opponent."</i>. The rule says "greater responsibility"; it <b>doesn't</b> say "total responsibility". That's why I think that it's not an <b>automatic</b> foul on the defender and you have to judge each play on it's own merits.

Ya know, I looked and I looked and I looked again...but I cannot find a single time where I used the word automatically in this thread.

Until now.

So....when you said the correct call is a foul on B1, you meant....sometimes?

I meant as I envisioned the play.

Never say never.

I had a HS game where the dribbler tripped over his own feet while being dogged by an opponent. I had a clear view, I saw there was zero contact. Not even close. I gave the universal signal for nothing...arms outstretched, emphatically shaking my head back & forth. (Unapproved mechanic alert!!)

A1's coach jumped up wondering what I was looking at. I T'ed him immediately. He shut up & sat down.

Soooo....I can't say never....but pretty darned close to it.

Thanks for fighting the war for me Dan.