game plat situation #2

[crew]

here is the setup.
you are slot opposite the table. a1 drives from trails area to the basket(with the ball) slightly out of control. as he drives he stumbles, throws up a shot(misses) and falls to the floor. b1, on backside rebounding jumps(slightly forward) and grabs the rebound. a1's momentum takes him under b1's feet. as b1 comes down from the jump he lands on top of a1 and falls to the floor with control of the ball. what would you call?

i called tripping(triping) foul on a1.
why? many thoughts went through my head.
1. my partners had no foul on the drive nor shot.(a1 falls without help)
2. a1 had no legal position laying on the floor.
3. verticality goes from the as high as the ceiling and as low as the floor.

i have asked many officials what they would call and get a 50/50 response. travel/foul
is there anything i am not considering that i should/could consider?

[BktBallRef]

I would probably call traveling. Every player is entitled to a spot on the floor provided such player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent. You staed that the rebounder jumped slightly forward. Therefore, he probably did not go up and come down within his vertical plane.

Sometimes ugly things happen.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by crew
here is the setup.
you are slot opposite the table. a1 drives from trails area to the basket(with the ball) slightly out of control. as he drives he stumbles, throws up a shot(misses) and falls to the floor. b1, on backside rebounding jumps(slightly forward) and grabs the rebound. a1's momentum takes him under b1's feet. as b1 comes down from the jump he lands on top of a1 and falls to the floor with control of the ball. what would you call?

i called tripping(triping) foul on a1.
why? many thoughts went through my head.
1. my partners had no foul on the drive nor shot.(a1 falls without help)
2. a1 had no legal position laying on the floor.
3. verticality goes from the as high as the ceiling and as low as the floor.

i have asked many officials what they would call and get a 50/50 response. travel/foul
is there anything i am not considering that i should/could consider?

10.6.1E is a similar play. A1 is entitled to his/her position, even if it's momentarily lying on the floor after falling down.

Call the travel.

[mick]

A Travel works.

[RecRef]

Originally posted by crew
here is the setup.
b1, on backside rebounding jumps(slightly forward) and grabs the rebound. a1's momentum takes him under b1's feet. as b1 comes down from the jump he lands on top of a1 and falls to the floor with control of the ball. what would you call?

Is A1 still moving when B1 lands on him? If so, I call a foul. Which foul is the question? I would say block because A1 is moving into the path of B1's landing. If he has already stopped than it is traveling. (one I would not like to see on my watch)

[eroe39]

This is a tough play. In my opinion there are certain situations where players are not entitled to the position they are in. If a player is on the floor with legs and arms spread out and a player falls over him the foul is on the player on the floor. If a defensive player is bent over and a player jumps into him on a drive to the basket and that offensive player is submarined and practically does a flip and falls to the floor hard the foul is on the defensive player. If a player is standing with his legs spread out way outside the plane of his shoulders and he is set and a dribbler tries to get around him and trips over the defender's foot the foul is on the defender. If a defensive player is standing underneath the basket and a offensive player drives in for a dunk and then a collision occurs this is a foul on the defensive player. All these are tough plays but in my opinion illustrate that there are certain defensive positions that are unnatural and are not part of the game of basketball and thus should be penalized. This philosophy is used by pro officials extensively, by college officials a great deal, and by high school officials not as much. Strive to match your philosophy to top notch officials and call fouls on these plays.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by eroe39
This is a tough play. In my opinion there are certain situations where players are not entitled to the position they are in.

First, welcome to the board!

You're knew here so I'll tell you what most of us already know. When dealing with rule situations, opinions mean very little to those of us who are students of the game. Can you reference a rule that backs up your stand that "there are certain situations where players are not entitled to the position they are in?" Because I can, and will, give your reasons why several of the situations you present are not fouls on the defender.

If a player is on the floor with legs and arms spread out and a player falls over him the foul is on the player on the floor.

Not true. 10.6.1 E
10.6.1 SITUATION E: B1 attempts to steal the ball from stationary A1 who is holding the ball. B1 misses the ball and falls to the floor. In dribbling away, A1 contacts B1's leg, loses control of the ball and falls to the floor. Ruling: No infraction or foul has occurred and play continues. Unless B1 made an effort to trip or block A1, he/she is entitled to a position on the court even if it is momentarily lying on the floor after falling down. (7-4-1, 2)

If a defensive player is bent over and a player jumps into him on a drive to the basket and that offensive player is submarined and practically does a flip and falls to the floor hard the foul is on the defensive player.

Not true. 4-23-3d
ART. 3 After the initial legal guarding position is obtained:
d. [/b]The guard may turn or duck to absorb the shock of imminent contact.[/b]

If a player is standing with his legs spread out way outside the plane of his shoulders and he is set and a dribbler tries to get around him and trips over the defender's foot the foul is on the defender.

Agreed. 4-23-1
A player who extends an arm, shoulder, hip or leg into the path of an opponent is not considered to have a legal position if contact occurs.

If a defensive player is standing underneath the basket and a offensive player drives in for a dunk and then a collision occurs this is a foul on the defensive player.

Not true. 10.6.1 D
B1 is standing behind the plane of the backboard before A1 jumps for a lay-up shot. The forward momentum causes airborne shooter A1 to charge into B1.
Ruling: B1 is entitled to the position obtained legally before A1 left the floor. If the ball goes through the basket before or after the contact occurs, the player-control foul cancels the goal. However, if B1 moves into the path of A1 after A1 has left the floor, the foul is on B1. B1's foul on the airborne shooter is a foul during the act of shooting. If the shot is successful, one free throw is awarded and if it is unsuccessful, two free throws result. (4-19-1, 6; 6-7-4; Penalty Summary 2, 5a)

All these are tough plays but in my opinion illustrate that there are certain defensive positions that are unnatural and are not part of the game of basketball and thus should be penalized.

Then why aren't those situations considered fouls on the defense by those who write the rules. When we take it upon ourselves to call the game as we see it, we do a disservice to ourselves, the fans, players and coaches.

This philosophy is used by pro officials extensively, by college officials a great deal, and by high school officials not as much. Strive to match your philosophy to top notch officials and call fouls on these plays.

When officiating high school basketball, we must follow the rules for high school basketball, no matter what our brothers in the NBA and NCAA do. Strive to call the rules based on the game that you're officiating. Don't apply NBA and NCAA philsophies, rules, and mechanics to NFHS situations when the rules don't apply. You'll find that most of the situations here are posted by high school officials, based on NF rules.

Again, welcome to the board!

[eroe39]

Basketball Ref, I appreciate your input and I like the way you cite your information from the casebook. I think of this play from the point of view of the rebounder, who jumps to get the rebound and while fading back if he contacted an opponent standing up then 99% of the time this would be an incidental play with no foul call. However, if he comes down on someone on the floor then he would most likely get his feet tangled up and fall to the floor. This is not right, in my opinion, to call a travel here and penalize the rebounder. Players lying on the floor is not part of the game of basketball. Likewise, players standing underneath the basket is not part of the game of basketball. I agree that your casebook citations support you, however, it is also in the college rule book/casebook that a player is allowed to draw a charge underneath the basket, but officials are taught by top college officials at camps and other places to call this a block. Not everything should be taken literally from the rulebook. Rules are very important and I study them often, but we have to apply our own common sense as well. For example the rule book says we can call a 3 second violation while the ball is in team control, but not player control but obviously if the ball is rolling around and is loose we would use common sense and not call 3 seconds here.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by eroe39
Basketball Ref, I appreciate your input and I like the way you cite your information from the casebook. I think of this play from the point of view of the rebounder, who jumps to get the rebound and while fading back if he contacted an opponent standing up then 99% of the time this would be an incidental play with no foul call. However, if he comes down on someone on the floor then he would most likely get his feet tangled up and fall to the floor. This is not right, in my opinion, to call a travel here and penalize the rebounder. Players lying on the floor is not part of the game of basketball. Likewise, players standing underneath the basket is not part of the game of basketball. I agree that your casebook citations support you, however, it is also in the college rule book/casebook that a player is allowed to draw a charge underneath the basket, but officials are taught by top college officials at camps and other places to call this a block. Not everything should be taken literally from the rulebook. Rules are very important and I study them often, but we have to apply our own common sense as well. For example the rule book says we can call a 3 second violation while the ball is in team control, but not player control but obviously if the ball is rolling around and is loose we would use common sense and not call 3 seconds here.

Whoa!!! Where did we start talking about judgement on a travel? Either the player travelled or he/she didn't.

The college interpretation is that fouls below the backboard are automatically blocks. If you're working college basketball, call it that way - because that is probably what the assignors want. When calling HS, go by the NFHS rules and interpretations!

One of the basics of basketball is that every player is entitled to a spot on the court. As long as the player on the floor got there in enough time to let A1 go around him, there can be no foul on the player on the floor.

[drinkeii]

I was going to quote the thing that I had a question about, but I couldn't find the original statement when I went looking for it!

What reasoning would be used by the assignors in College or higher in stating that Block/Charge calls made behind the plane of the backboard should be called as blocks? It seems to me that the area behind the backboard is no different than anywhere else on the court, with the obvious exception of not being allowed to pass over the backboard if it is rectangular.

Also, not to open a can of worms, but why do the assignors have the ability to make their own rules interpretations? Is this part of the job? In High School, as far as I understand it, we have a rules interpreter who handles that aspect, but his interpertations come from the state association. The assignor schedules games.

[ChuckElias]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark Dexter

The college interpretation is that fouls below the backboard are automatically blocks.

Mark, I don't think that's correct. You may be thinking about the experimental rules from last season. In certain pre-"conference schedule" tournaments (Maui Invitational, Great Alaska Shootout, etc.) last season, the NCAA experimented with the NBA's "no charge" zone. The painted the little half-circle under the basket. The rule was that a defender coming over to help cannot draw a charge while inside that semicircle. So:

1) As I understand it, the rule only applies to a second defender, coming over to help; and

2) It's not "automatically" a block; most officials will simply pass on the call. But if there's enough contact for a whistle, then it has to be a block.

In any case, the rule was not adopted for the current season, and while many officials pass on contact that occurs "in the shadow of the rim", there is no official rule (to my knowledge) mandating the "no charge" philosophy that you mention.

Chuck

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by eroe39
Basketball Ref, I appreciate your input and I like the way you cite your information from the casebook. I think of this play from the point of view of the rebounder, who jumps to get the rebound and while fading back if he contacted an opponent standing up then 99% of the time this would be an incidental play with no foul call. However, if he comes down on someone on the floor then he would most likely get his feet tangled up and fall to the floor. This is not right, in my opinion, to call a travel here and penalize the rebounder.

Then write to the rules committee and ask that the rule be changed to reflect your opinion.

Or, state in your answer that "the rule is "x", but I think it's a "bad rule." I'll still cal it as the NFHS wants it."

Players lying on the floor is not part of the game of basketball. Likewise, players standing underneath the basket is not part of the game of basketball. I agree that your casebook citations support you, however, it is also in the college rule book/casebook that a player is allowed to draw a charge underneath the basket, but officials are taught by top college officials at camps and other places to call this a block.

That's (sort of) the men's rule only. The women's rule is that this is a block (or a no call). (The men's rule is that if the shot is good, then it should be a no-call. If the shot is missed *and* the defender is placed at a rebounding disadvantage, it should be a charge (not PC). Rarely would you see both items happen, so you'll rarely see a charge call.)

Not everything should be taken literally from the rulebook. Rules are very important and I study them often, but we have to apply our own common sense as well. For example the rule book says we can call a 3 second violation while the ball is in team control, but not player control but obviously if the ball is rolling around and is loose we would use common sense and not call 3 seconds here.

THe latest women's NCAA memo makes a clear point on the difference between a "loose ball" and an "interrupted dribble" and says to call the 3-seconds during a loose ball. Since it's a POE in women's ball this year, I suspect you'll see some of it -- and you'll start to see it trickle down to the HS game.

BTW, if you use paragraphs in your posts, they'll be easier to read.

[Mark Dexter]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ChuckElias

Originally posted by Mark Dexter

Mark, I don't think that's correct. You may be thinking about the experimental rules from last season. In certain pre-"conference schedule" tournaments (Maui Invitational, Great Alaska Shootout, etc.) last season, the NCAA experimented with the NBA's "no charge" zone. The painted the little half-circle under the basket. The rule was that a defender coming over to help cannot draw a charge while inside that semicircle. So:

1) As I understand it, the rule only applies to a second defender, coming over to help; and

2) It's not "automatically" a block; most officials will simply pass on the call. But if there's enough contact for a whistle, then it has to be a block.

In any case, the rule was not adopted for the current season, and while many officials pass on contact that occurs "in the shadow of the rim", there is no official rule (to my knowledge) mandating the "no charge" philosophy that you mention.

Chuck

What I'm thinking of is that, as BktBallRef said, I believe, contact under the basket is generally a block or a no-call.

I see it as somewhat similar to the NF 10 second restriction on free throws. Yes, you are within rule to call it, but if you do it excessively, you're not going to be assigned a ton of games.

[crew]

the reasoning for the restricted area in the pro and nc2a womens, is that a defender cannot(not all the time but most) defend the basket/contest a shot while standing under the basket. this is the philosophy, which goes along with the player lying on the floor, he cannot defend anything so there is no point on being on the floor accident or not. this is not in the mens rules but is taught at the mens camps. they just want us to look a little deeper into the situation, these plays are not black and white.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter
What I'm thinking of is that, as BktBallRef said, I believe, contact under the basket is generally a block or a no-call.

Nope! Definitely was not me that said that!

Originally posted by crew
the reasoning for the restricted area in the pro and nc2a womens, is that a defender cannot(not all the time but most) defend the basket/contest a shot while standing under the basket. this is the philosophy, which goes along with the player lying on the floor, he cannot defend anything so there is no point on being on the floor accident or not. this is not in the mens rules but is taught at the mens camps. they just want us to look a little deeper into the situation, these plays are not black and white.

D*mn crew, is your rule book gray?

When there are rules and case book plays in place to cover a specific situation, then the colors are black and white, not gray.

BTW, I bet they didn't teach you that at a high school camp. One of the biggest problems in high school basketball today is that too many officials go to camp, come home, and try to apply college mechanics, philosphies and rules to high school basketball. For those who do this, give us all a break and stop calling HS ball. You're just making it more difficult for the rest of us.