The "And 1"
 

I'm just wondering what everyone else's philosophy is regarding calling a foul if the basket goes in.

Personally, the way I call it is that if the basket goes in, there's no disadvantage to the shooter, and I'm not calling anything unless the contact completely unnecessary, or I don't realize the ball's going in the hoop.

So, I'm wondering how many of you guys call it like this, and how many will give the shooter the extra shot?

I call solid contact that should not be ignored. I pass on minimal contact that didn't effect the play.

Essentially, call the obvious.

So you will call a foul on a shot when the ball goes it, but if the EXACT SAME THING happens and the ball doesn't go in you won't call a foul??

Or you will call a foul when the shot doesn't go in and NOTHING if the shot is made? A foul is foul...call it!

Haha that what I meant. Woops :D

Not all contact is a foul.

Yes, but this isn't the topic at hand. If contact is a foul on a missed shot, why is the same contact not a foul on a made shot?

I agree with Nevadaref emphatically.

Me too! :D

I understand where you're coming from, but this might be too much of a generalization at the HS level. I think Nevada is on the right track. Get the obvious. I tend not to call too many "And 1" fouls. I very rarely call them in the post. If they can power it in, unless it's an obvious one, get the players up and down the floor.

Couldn't be the exact same contact. Do you understand advantage/disadvantage?

As I understand the point: obvious fouls should be called. Borderline fouls should be called depending on advantage/disadvantage. That is: if the foul prevents the shot/basket, then call it. Otherwise, don't slow down the game.

Of course I understand advantage/disadvantage, do you? I also agree with Nevada, but the first post implies a foul that should be called won't be called if the shot is made.

Yes, it could be the exact same contact.

You might be misreading the original post: see the "unless" clause.

I'm not sure what the poster means by "unnecessary" contact, but a charitable reading would use this to mark the distinction between obvious and borderline fouls.

That would make the OP consistent with the advice to call all obvious fouls (regardless of what happens to the shot), but leave the borderline fouls unless they disadvantage the shooter.

And, by "it couldn't be the same contact," I meant that the exact same contact in borderline fouls cannot both block the shot and allow it to go in. There's either disadvantage, or there isn't.

There is always going to be some contact in the game of basket. You cannot call everything a foul.

Peace

To me, if the contact makes the shot significantly more difficult, it's a foul whether the ball goes in or not. Frankly, I often don't know whether the shot falls or not (I pregame this with my partners) because after the whistle I'm watching the players. What constitutes "significant" is going to change with the level of play, and is for me to judge. :)

A foul is a foul, but not all contact is a foul. The shot being made or missed should not determine if contact should be a foul

It's dangerous to have a black and white philosophy on "and 1's", or anything else for that matter.

To me a made basket is only a small part of advantage/disadvantage in these situations:

What if the game is getting close to that line and not calling pretty good contact, just because the ball went in, keeps it on that slide into the crapper?

I've seen plenty of cases where a routine lay up turns into a Sportscenter highlight because of contact, IMO, that is gaining an advantage and the made shot means nothing.

This call is like any other call and it requires getting a feel for what needs to be an and 1, and what can be passed on, I just wouldn't use the shot going in as my measuring stick.

The shot going in (especially in the post) definitely will influence whether a foul is called at higher levels.

Sometimes we just don't know if there's a disadvantage until we see the whole picture, and that includes the shot. Slow whistles are all good, IMO.

nothing more need be said !!!!

I'm just going to add that if the defender hits the shooter near the elbow, the foul should be called regardless of whether the basket is made or not. Any shot made after the forearm is hit near the elbow is a miracle, and the defender should not be permitted to continue this defensive tactic without consequence. This is an attempt to cheat, pure and simple, and should not be condoned. Even the slightest of contact in this area can make a shot almost impossible to sink.

No rules reference, just my thoughts on the matter from someone who has witnessed coaches teach this reprehensible move. "Don't worry, the refs won't call it!"

I don't think you can wait to see if the shot goes in or not before you decide to call a foul or not (too much time elapses). I think the better way to judge the severity of contact is whether the offensive player continues the shooting motion relatively "freely" - that is to say: did he play thru the contact or did the contact significantly restrict the shooting motion?

You can't assume the contact made the shooter miss the shot (after all plenty of shots are missed when there is no contact at all).

It depends on how you look at advantage disadvantage. Almost every D1 official I've heard or talked to at camps say to hold the whistle and see if the ball goes down. I'm not sure that is right for a HS game, but that's they way I was taught. I know I'm very patient with shooting foul calls.

New ref here, only doing youth BB for now, HS later. I've been trolling around this board for a couple of weeks and I'm a little confused (actually a lot confused depending on the rule) about some things, including advantage/disadvantage. Specifically relating to this thread, I'm wondering why an official would choose to ignore a shooting foul if the basket was made and yet call the same foul if the basket was not made.

As I understand some of the officials that have posted, they wouldn't call the foul because it didn't place the offended player at a disadvantage and/or didn't effect the outcome of the shot; and that the determination as to disadvantage or effect is solely based upon whether or not the ball ultimately went into the basket.

<O:p</O:pI don't understand this, so I'm hoping for further explanation. Is the philosophy of being at a “disadvantage” that a player is not at a disadvantage as long as the outcome of the play/shot is what that player intended to happen (such as a basket)? It doesn’t make sense that just because the player ultimately made the basked that he wasn’t necessarily put in a disadvantageous situation as the result of the foul.
<O:p</O:p
It seems to me that just because the basket was made, it doesn't mean that the shooter was not placed at a disadvantage, it could just mean that the player overcame the disadvantage and made the basket and/or the disadvantage wasn’t so severe that it effected the ultimate outcome of the shot. Is an official required to judge how much of a disadvantage the foul caused and only call the foul if it crosses a certain threshold or resulted in an unintended outcome?

<O:p</O:p
If the basis for calling a foul is whether or not the basket was made, a foul with a basket = no disadvantage and conversely, a foul without a basket = disadvantage. In a situation when there is a foul and then a missed shot how would the official determine whether or not the foul caused a disadvantage .. it may have been a shot that wouldn’t have gone in anyway, therefore the foul did not call a disadvantage and it is not called.

<O:p</O:p
From a newbie perspective it doesn’t make sense to not call a foul simply/only because the offended player made the basket, when the same foul would have been called if the basket was not successful.
<O:p</O:p
<O:p</O:p
So, this is really my ultimate question. Should the basis upon which the official makes the decision to call (or not call) the foul be:
<O:p</O:p
1. Whether of not the shooter was placed at a perceived disadvantage because of the foul; or<O:p</O:p
2. Whether or not the shooter achieved his intended goal (in this case a basket) in spite of the foul, whether or not the foul put the player at a disadvantage?
<O:p</O:p
<O:p</O:p
….. or should the foul be called because it was a violation of the rules and it really isn’t possible to truly determine whether or not it caused a disadvantage.<O:p</O:p

No, it's not. But a foul is not determined by whether a round ball goes through a medal hoop or not. If I'm wrong, plus reference the rule so I can read it.

IOW, anytime you're watching a college game and the official calls a foul on a made basket, he's screwed up. Is that correct?

I'm having a hard time following all this. A strong player can follow through and finish a shot with two people hanging on his arm sometimes. A player can miss an easy shot while being baaaarely bumped. (or not bumped at all)
In a nutshell, I don't see that the foul and whether the shot is good or not have anything to do with each other.

Good questions.

Simply put: sometimes 1, sometimes 2, sometimes neither.

:)

IMO this is all stuff you shouldn't worry all that much about putting in your games right now, concentrate on understanding the rules as written, making solid calls all the time, communicating well with your partner and maintaining good position.

Good question. I'm surprised at all the responses. I'm also surprised JR hasn't come in and stated what the rulebook says to do. That's where you want to start. What does the rulebook say? Also, it matters as to what level you are referring too. If you are referring to high school. I think you need to put air in the whistle more times than not on an And-1. However, there are other factors involved to me, more than just the ball going in or not. I think you also need to add in what the total team foul count is. If one team is way ahead in the foul count, I may just keep playing, but if the team that fouls is behind in the foul count. For ex: 9 - 1 team fouls, well they now have 2 team fouls. I would add this to the equation. Also, I would add to the equation the intensity level at this time in the game.

What I think will get you in trouble is a late whistle on an And-1. If the ball hangs on the rim or bounces around and you're waiting to see if it goes down and it rolls out, and you put air in the whistle, defense gets the rebound. Guaranteed the coach is gonna have some choice words for you and the crew on that one.

A good example I can share with you is related to the men (not college). I had a player come down the paint hard the other day, go up and slam it home while the defense went up hard to block. Major collision at the basket (I'm lead and I was right underneath it), dunk successful, play ball. He misses dunk, we're shooting two. Where I think I draw the difference here is the intent of the defense. Did the defense go to block (or play) the ball or they just tried to foul the player? Any contact to the head or face will be a foul at any level. Anything less, my judgement. This same play in college is a foul to me.

Hope this helps...

So you're saying the team foul count is a factor in your next foul call?
And you're also saying that the reason you shouldn't wait to see if the shot goes in is because it will make a coach mad?

This should really open a floodgate.

1) I beg to differ, but I also must say that your personal philosophy does not surprise me at all. Call fouls depending on how many fouls each team has been charged with at that particular time. Yup, heckuva idea.

2) At what college level that you are working is that a foul, JMO? D1, D2, D3, NAIA, JC? I'm just wondering if you call it that way in your D1 games as well as games at the lower college levels.

I'm not sure I said anything about whether it had to go through the hoop or not.

That would be correct JR. It is our judgement and if I'm in between on an foul infraction, well if the team count is 9-1, it's not in between no more.

Peace

If you're in between on a foul, you shouldn't call it.

Only penalize clear violations of the rules. If it's iffy, it doesn't need to be called. And I don't believe in this trying to equalize the foul count BS, if it's a foul, when the count is 1-1, it's a foul when the count is 5-4 and it's a still a foul when the count is 9-1.

If it isn't a foul at 5-4 or 1-1 then I'm not calling it at 9-1.

And your answer to my second question is?

I think you're trying to be too correct. I think the times where you are not sure you should blow your whistle or not, occurs quite often in the game. Have you ever made a call and wish you didn't blow. I know I have, just about every game. I'm not saying I call fouls based exclusively on foul counts. That is not what I said. However, if unsure on a given play, that imbalance might sway me to lend more towards it being an infraction or not. Again, we want to be consistent at both ends of the floor.

I let whether the basket is made inform my judgement on marginal contact.

Some contact clearly disadvantages a player and will always be called. Sometimes this player will be able to overcome the disadvantage and make a basket. He is rewarded with the "and 1."

Some contact is so trivial that it will never be called. Tough luck.

Some contact could go either way. For this contact, I look at the result to see what disadvantage might have occured. If I haven't determined within a second that the player was disadvantaged, I pass. If in that second something "bad" happens to the offended player (missed or ackward shot, interupted dribble, bad pass, etc.), I call the contact. If none of those things happen, what disadvantage has occured?

Now, on long shots you usually don't have the chance to see if it is good or not so you have to go with less information than you can go with in the post.

I don't believe in evening up the foul count either, in fact I had a game last night where it was 7 to 0 at one point time, and it was just the plain fact that the team who had 7 were just murderers.

On that note though, I am still with old school. I do take the foul count into consideration on some plays. I'm sure you have all heard something similar to this on the floor: "Alright guys white has 6 and blue has 1, let's not make anything up but let's just make sure we don't miss one against blue"

So in that case that tells me if I have contact on something marginal it is not going to hurt me to take that play, especially in the first half when more than likely that foul is going to be the kids first(they have one foul overall)

The great official Dave Libbey said this and posed it as a question to a group of officials: "Do you think you can have the same play at different parts of the game, and call it differently and still be right?" To that he answered yes you could, and he was talking about situations like foul counts and the time of the game or the half.

_________________________
Basket? I miss Mr. Annoying Grammar Guy. Actually Rut, you can call everything. I had a partner two weeks ago who did. Needless to say, it was a horrible night!!!!!

As for the original post, call the fouls and let the ticky tack stuff go. If he's hacked and makes it he deserved the "and 1!"

IMHO, a foul is a foul. If the contact is sufficient I'll call it and if I judge it incidental I won't - whether the attempt is successful or not.

And I really dislike the term "and 1" - undoubtedly coined by some announcer somewhere.

Actually, I think that you probably can blame some veteran NBA official back in prehistoric times- back in the late 50's and 60's. It's been around for a while. I can remember watching NBA games live when I was a teenager and hearing veteran officials like Joe Gushue and Mendy Rudolph using the term on court.

You must have taken really good notes.

And when I read 'em, I break out crying.

I missed the Sexual Revolution by <b>that</b> much!

Thank God for that!!! Can you imagine a bunch of little JR's running around the country??? Yikes...

"Who's your Daddy?":D

As a newer official trying to get a feel for things, I'm agreeing with ref18 on this.
Being consistent is a pretty valuable attribute when trying to attain a level of respectability as an official. If I'm not calling a foul early on, I'm not calling the same thing late in the game just to even things up. If the foul count is way off, it's because you and your partner are calling them that way.

Or because one team is playing more aggressively than the other, or tries to make up for physically what they lack in skills, or.........

Officials that are doing their job have little or no effect on how even the foul count is. Consistency is important. We've all heard "don't call something in Q4 that you didn't call in Q1". I like to think of it a little differently - more along the lines of "don't let something go in Q1 that you would probably call in Q4". Set the limits early, then stick by them throughout the game. Any halfway decently coached team will adjust.

I am with the school of thought that you need to get obvious contact and not worry about whether the ball goes in or not. I think it is an irritant to coaches, players and fans for an official to come in with an extremely late whistle when waiting to see if the ball goes in. At some point we need to make the judgement ourselves. I was told at a camp somewhere that the goal of officials is to blow all fouls on a "10." A 9 is somewhat acceptable, as is an 11, but anything before means you're anticipating and not seeing the whole play and anything later means you're indecisive.

I do think whether the ball goes in can be an indicator of what types of fouls you're calling, and if it goes in too often, it may indicate that you're calling too much marginal contact and need to figure out why. What I think, though, we need to avoid is the mentality that we won't call "and 1s" because this mentality can lead to officiating to avoid calling plays that exist, which leads us to letting too much go. Just my humble opinion though.

SME,

I like your answer, but I don't understand the "10" thing. Could you explain further?

Big guy shoots a layup, little guy got no chance to stop. Big guy is gonna make this shot, however, little guy hits his shooting arm. Ball goes in, play on, no foul. I have done this many times.

Being a player and I still play on occasion. Current college players play thru contract. In the pickup games, they beat here other up. I mean they battle and they never call a foul or slow the game down. The professional player knows to play thru some contact.

Where I got myself in some trouble is my scenario above. In one instance, the shot doesn't go down. So in this situation, men's game, I got disadvantage because he hit the shooting arm, so I put air in the whistle, 2 shots!!! The best dunker in the gym came out of nowhere, caught the ball off the rim and made a spectacle put-back dunk! Bought the house down. Damn! I said to myself as I had to wave it off, 2 shots for the big guy, little guy on the shooting arm.

I think this is an excellent question. Damn if you do, damn if you don't. Isn't officiating fun? Coaches will play both sides of this issue too. They will say, if you don't call it and the shot falls out, call the foul ref! Then, if something like what I explained above happens. Coach will say, come on ref, you could have let that one go! Defensive coach will say, good call ref!

If its a foul, ITS A FOUL. Make the call and be CONSISTANT.

There is nothing I hate more then having to say to a coach that the ball went in so we no called it at your end but the exact same contact at the other end gets called because your opponent missed his shot.

Actually I have never had to do this but would really not like to either.

While true, this tautology is unhelpful advice to someone trying to determine whether it's a foul.

This doesn't make sense to me. If it were the exact same contact, the shot would have gone in. The fact that the shot was missed shows that it was NOT the exact same contact.

Big guy shoots a layup, little guy got no chance to stop. Big guy is gonna make this shot, however, little guy hits his shooting arm. Ball goes in, play on, no foul. I have done this many times.

Being a player and I still play on occasion. Current college players play thru contract. In the pickup games, they beat here other up. I mean they battle and they never call a foul or slow the game down. The professional player knows to play thru some contact.

Where I got myself in some trouble is my scenario above. In one instance, the shot doesn't go down. So in this situation, men's game, I got disadvantage because he hit the shooting arm, so I put air in the whistle, 2 shots!!! The best dunker in the gym came out of nowhere, caught the ball off the rim and made a spectacle put-back dunk! Bought the house down. Damn! I said to myself as I had to wave it off, 2 shots for the big guy, little guy on the shooting arm.

I think this is an excellent question. Damn if you do, damn if you don't. Isn't officiating fun? Coaches will play both sides of this issue too. They will say, if you don't call it and the shot falls out, call the foul ref! Then, if something like what I explained above happens. Coach will say, come on ref, you could have let that one go! Defensive coach will say, good call ref!

Not necessarily. A lucky bouce on the rim and in it goes or one player just is able to play through the contact. Still same contact just different result.

I think someone will have something to say about part of your post above.

I was wondering why this thread kept growing and now I see. It is sort of funny to see someone say they don't have much experience and then go on to say, with authority, what is and isn't an "and 1." Calling a foul a foul regardless of anything else? Yeah, tell us how that works out for you. :) How many officials have a different opinion about these calls now than they did 10 years ago? I do. How many officials would call them differently now than they would 10 years ago? I do. How many officials can instinctively call a high school game on Tuesday differently than a JUCO game on Wednesday? Instincts or a feel for the game is what changes with experience. The more you have a feel for the game the better we handle situations and recognize BS like asking someone to chime in with a rule about an "and 1" situation. My advice would probably be close to:

If you are doing JV games, work on your focus in your primary and call almost everything you think is a foul regardless of the ball going in or not. As time goes on and you move up, develop a feel for these plays - and the game (awareness).

I can absolutely say that I have no absolutes when it comes to most of these plays.

Now this doesn't make sense at all.

Why assume 2 different players react the same to contact?
Why assume both players shot the ball exactly the same way?

Bingo!

We have a winner.

Why not? It was 2 different shooters on 2 different shots from 2 different spots.

IMO, there is no one correct answer but I'd say this one :rolleyes: is pretty accurate.
The "and1" play is one of the most exciting plays in basketball and if a kid earns it, I say don't deny him.
I agree that the higher the level, the more (s)he has to earn it.

Good Topic
 

This thread is right on time for me. I am on the sub varsity circuit and I have learned to blow my whistle. Now I am learning when to pass on a whistle.

My latest learning sitch was the other night. Boys frosh game. player A makes a lay-up. On the way back down to earth Player B gives him a little nudge with his hip. I didn't like it, almost whistled it but I passed. Sure enough the sitch is reversed and Team A gives a nice hard hip shot to Team B on their return to earth. I tweet that one.

The lesson I learned is to trust my instincts are whether it's passable or not. In retrospect I should have tweeted that first one but have been feeling pressured to call less fouls and I let that factor into my decision.

Some of us have exercised the Ignore option when it comes to particular person.

Similar ideas....
 

As I have been moving up the ladder, the line of thinking that I have been presented with on this topic is that a varsity, college, and\or pro ref has to make a decision based on what they can pass on, not what they should call. This way, the game flows more.

There might be contact on a pass and crash, but the ball was thrown out of bounds. Save the foul, award the ball out of bounds to team B. Keep playing.

A1 running on a break; B1 comes in late and tries to stop the layup. B1 reaches in and fouls A1 as A1 passes ahead to A2 for the dunk/layup. Do you call B1's foul or let it go for the two points that A got?

Ultimately, teams want to score. Incidental contact is part of the game, and all contact is not necessarily a foul. The decisions that are made by us can make or break a game, but each individual ref has his/her own philosophy about what they should and shouldn't call. Our assignors also carry a heavy influence on what we should and shouldn't call, and we have to appease them in order to continue to move up the ladder. So work with it.

Exact same philosophy as a newbie myself...and I've no called some beauties that may have been grounds for misdemeanor assaults. I never look up at the ball, I rely on the trail to tell me if the shot went in. Especially in very close and emotionally charged games, I think the lead should have his eyes on the players in the paint until he's ready to move tableside and report. Too much opportunity for shenanigans. Bottom line, more experienced officials than I have given this sage advise: judge the advanatage/disadvantage each time, regardless of score, foul counts, fan's reactions or coach's stupidity.