How late is too late??

[Jimgolf]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

If the contact makes a player lose the ball, there is nowayinhell that could ever be called "incidental" contact. Incidental contact means that the contact doesn't give one player an advantage over another.

If you tap a player on the shoulder is it a foul? How about if you tap a player on the shoulder and he looks up and dribbles the ball off his foot? The tap on the shoulder doesn't cause him to lose the ball. The player's inability to dribble when not playing close attention to what he's doing causes him to lose the ball.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Jimgolf

How about if you tap a player on the shoulder and he looks up and dribbles the ball off his foot?

Ok, interesting question. Here's what Jurassic said in the post you quoted:

If the contact makes a player lose the ball, there is nowayinhell that could ever be called "incidental" contact.

You then comment:

The tap on the shoulder doesn't cause him to lose the ball.

I think you just answered your own question!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Jimgolf

1) If you tap a player on the shoulder is it a foul?

2) How about if you tap a player on the shoulder and he looks up and dribbles the ball off his foot?

3) The tap on the shoulder doesn't cause him to lose the ball. The player's inability to dribble when not playing close attention to what he's doing causes him to lose the ball.

1) If the tap gives the other team an illegal advantage by making the player lose the ball, then it sureasheck is a foul. Every time.

2) Yes, that's a foul. The tap created a definite disadvantage for the offensive player. He lost control of his dribble because of the contact.

3) Disagree. Diverting the player's attention through illegal contact caused the player to lose the ball. The defender gained an illegal advantage through that act. That's why it's a foul.

Methinks you really need to get someone to explain advantage/disadvantage to you. You don't seem to understand the concept. The degree of the contact isn't the deciding factor. The result of the contact is.

[Jimgolf]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Methinks you really need to get someone to explain advantage/disadvantage to you. You don't seem to understand the concept. The degree of the contact isn't the deciding factor. The result of the contact is.

I understand the concept of advantage/disadvantage. However, I also understand that incidental contact can cause a disadvantage. Incidental contact is not a foul. However, according to your interpretation, incidental contact that causes a disadvantage is not incidental contact. This is pure Newspeak.

Advantage/disadvantage should be used to determine if a foul has occured if there is any question in your mind. It should not be the sole determining factor. For example, displacement should always be called a foul, regardless of whether you judge that an advantage has been gained. Conversely, placing a hand on a player always gives an advantage, since the player can be tracked without looking. Is this a foul? Now we're getting into "How much of an advantage is gained?" In a sense, the mantra of "read the rulebook" becomes meaningless because the game becomes one not of rules, but of opinions. This makes it impossible to get a level playing field, since everyone has differing opinons.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Jimgolf

I also understand that incidental contact can cause a disadvantage.

By definition, I think this is false.

I also disagree with most of the rest of that post. I do think that "advantage / disadvantage" is often an over-used excuse for not calling a foul.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by sj

Last night in a high school summer league I had a play that I don't think I've had happen before. At least the way it did. I'm trail. A1 is dribbling parallel to the free throw line when B1 comes up on him and bumps him a little. It throws him a bit off his path and sort of turns A1 around so he is going to start to dribble back the other way. At this point I had nothing. A1 had not been trying to go around B1 or anything. The bump caused him a little trouble but it just wasn't enough to call and it looked like he was recovering just fine. However B2 came streaking up the lane and stole the ball clean as A1 was turning back the other way. He went in and made an easy layup.

I would bet that 99% of refs would leave the bump, in and of itself, alone just like I did. But then it turned bad. In actuality A1 was still recovering from what little contact there was. He was going to be fine and I have no problem thinking that at that point I had done the right thing. But A1 was definitely still in a recovery process as the ball was stolen. When the ball was stolen I just froze knowing that I had a problem as I had not seen him coming. I didn't blow my whistle because by the time I got unfrozen B2 was long gone. I think I should have gone ahead and called it even though it would have looked "late."

So maybe a good question to ask here is, using fanboy terminology,.....how late is too late?

What a great question and topic to explore on this forum. I am impressed with the fact you even asked this question. Unfortunately, there is no correct answer to this question. I think this has happened to every official, and we all struggle with it. The fact that you admit it is even bigger. Welcome to true officiating, we get some right, we miss some.

I'm going to approach this from a different angle, even though I think you should have made the call. I would be lying if I said this hasn't happen to me and I blew the whistle. In a recent camp, I called a handcheck on the ball atop the key. Clinician got on me saying the call didn't need to be made because the A1 never lost control. Then they turned around and said the game was getting too rough and we needed to call more. Welcome to officiating. I think we have to balance something that is unbalanceable, if that is a word.

In this particular case, and I have done it myself and I have seen it done. What ends up happening next is a make up call. The next time down the court, the slightest degree of contact and we got a call. I have seen this in the NBA and in DI college. This is one point you guys have not touched on but this is probadly the #1 thing that leads to makeup calls. I missed the call the last time down the court but I'm getting this one, even if the contact is not as severe. Of course, no official will admit to makeup calls which is why I think this is a great topic to explore.

[Camron Rust]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimgolf
I also understand that incidental contact can cause a disadvantage.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

By definition, I think this is false.

I disagree with you on this on Bob. I can imagine several forms of legal contact that cause a disadvantage....

• Contact on the hand in an attempt to play the ball.
• Two players coming from equally advantageous positions in an attempt to get to a loose ball and one of them is bigger than the other and the collission at the ball knocks the smaller on down.
• A player sets a legal screen, the defender runs into it. The contact is incidental but legally puts the defender at a disadvantage.

[lrpalmer3]

People complain about a late call until the ball gets put in play again.

People complain about an obvious missed call until the next game starts three days later.