Unsportsmanlike?
 

Team A is playing a box-n-one defense on team B. Player A is closely guarding player B even when team A is on offense. He is guarding him very closely, facing him and staring right in his face. Player B had no room to even take a step forward. On one free throw, player B went to the opposite end and player A continued to shadow him and get in his face. Needless to say, player B was quite frustrated and was quite ineffective. Is this unsportsmanlike?

BTW, I was a spectator at this game.

If it's total body defense, and he maintains LGP and contact is all incidental, I think it's probably legal. Gotta watch for "face guarding", though. Ask how that's defined in your area. But otherwise, just close, suffocating guarding isn't unsportsmanlike, I don't think. Sounds like Team A figures they've got a better chance in the game if it's 4 on 4 rather than letting B1 be part of the play. Good plan if they can avoid fouls.

Unless they did not say anything derogatory to each other, I am really not sure what you described could be considered illegal. There is nothing wrong with guarding someone. A player being frustrated by this should not be a factor if everything else is legal. I do not see guarding someone close as one of the many classifications of something unsportsmanlike.

Peace

I agree that close guarding isn't illegal; however, I was leaning more toward a "taunting" unsporting foul. A1 was literally "in the face" of B1; virtually nose-to-nose. The fact that he maintained this posture even when his team was on offense seemed unsporting to me.

Do not go looking for stuff that is not there. There is nothing illegal about just standing near someone. If a player does not want someone near him, then move and use a screen to get that player away from you. Just because you do not like something does not make it illegal. You will not find a single interpretation that says there is something that this is illegal.

Peace

First: When Team B is in control of the ball, the guarding rules apply to players on Team A.

Second: No matter which team is in control of the ball or if neither team has control of the ball, then the screening rules apply to both Team A and Team B.

Therefore, as long as A1 was not committing any of the technical fouls that apply to taunting and unsportsmanlike conduct, then what A1 was doing against B1 was legal as long as the officials applied the guarding and screening rules correctly.

I am sure that B1 was getting frustrated if Team A's defense was doing its job against him.

MTD, Sr.

Unless he was "in his face" following a play in which he scored on the other player, or something similar, there's no taunting just for standing close and staring. Plus, you indicated there was never any contact, just proximity. This is a no-call all the way.

It's screening or guarding whether offense or defense, and perfectly legal, unless there was anything in the neighborhood or taunting or non-basketball stuff such as facial expressions or vocabulary that might be non-basketball.

I'd watch closely for goading and that kind of thing. Also, if that close play is maintained during a dead ball, I'd be on top of it, warning, separating, and maybe whacking. If A1 has a reputation for being a hothead, and it appears as though B1 is trying to just frustrate A into fouling or worse, you could call contact pretty closely as a way to back B up a little. But if A is just a really good player that B is trying to get out of the game, I think it's completely legal and cant be penalized in any way.

I'm sure this isn't what you mean, but I'd hate to think you would penalize B1 because of A1's inability to control his temper...

I used this exact tactic in my son's middle school game I was coaching several years ago. The subject was a big thug with a hot head and everyone knew it. I even went so far as to have a player shadow him when he went to the water fountain. He got extremely frustrated by the third quarter and fouled out. Totally neutralized his size and skill. His coach told me after the game that almost every team they played did the same thing. He ended up playing soccer by the time he got to high school.

What I meant was that if the guarding player (B or A??) is just trying to goad the hot head into losing his temper, rather than really trying to play basketball, I think it's borderline. Keep a close eye on it.

Why didn't B1 move, turn his back, spin off, etc? It takes two to tango. Honestly, If I were B1's coach I would alert the officials that we will try to draw a bocking call because A1 is not giving the proper time and distance. Second, if I were B1, and a defender was nose to nose with me, I would run him over or make my V-cut head first....or reach for a pass arms head high...

Get my drift? It sounds like B1 was a weenie.

I'll agree with you about B1 trying a little harder to get free. Maybe they decided that pulling A1 out of the game was a good idea and losing B1 seemed like a small price to pay. I'd be interested to hear how the game turned out. RevRef63?

I think I"ll give this one a pass.

Seems to me this tactic could easily backfire if you have a decent enough coach; especially after one or two times.

Yup, got your drift. Might work too if you got a couple of officials who don't know whatinthehell they are doing. Of course, if you do happen to get refs that know the rules, you'd be playing right into team A's plans with B1 picking up some stoopid fouls.

Good luck with that philosophy.

:D

It only would take once ,and as B1 I would gladly take that foul. I guaranty A1 would back off after that - especially with gauze in his nose. Wouldn't even be intentional or flagrant - to the best refs.

I might even offer a hand to A1 to help him up. ;)

:( :( :(
These are two of the most classless posts that I've ever read on the forum. To advocate that one player should intentionally injure another is totally disgusting.:mad:
If you really believe this garbage, then get away from HS sports.

Also all "the best refs" out there certainly would deem this a flagrant foul.

So they're required to utter unpleasantries? :p

Nevada, perhaps these were just badly worded, and he didn't mean anything quite so egregious as would be certainly deemed flagrant?? We might give him the benefit of the doubt until we know more...

No doubt about it. He is clearly advocating headhunting and hurting the opponent. :(

Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by MeRef
Second, if I were B1, and a defender was nose to nose with me, I would run him over or make my V-cut head first....or reach for a pass arms head high...

Get my drift?
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by MeRef
It only would take once ,and as B1 I would gladly take that foul. I guaranty A1 would back off after that - especially with gauze in his nose.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

MeRef? Care to comment?

Please tell me that you're not really an official.

Please.

Amen.

Sure, I'll comment. First, I am not advocating anything. Did you see me say HE SHOULD HAVE DONE THIS OR THAT? Nope. Matter of fact, I said he should try to get or turn away.

My subsequent comments were from the perspective of a former Division 1-AA college player, who routinely dealt with this sort of juvenile intimidation tactics. I actually said [Second, if I were B1,]. Maybe I should have put that in a clearer perspective. Even then, if NevadeRef thinks that players don't "run opponents over" then he needs to watch a game or two - like maybe what happened to Steve Nash. Certainly that was the reverse situation and flagrant in my book, but you get the point.

I was making the point that if you want to get in my grill, there are physical hazards to doing so. I am not going to give you a wide berth and give up my rightful place on the court. And, no, the best refs out there won't catch half of it or if they do, the college players are smart enough to make it look like an accident.

Certainly you see my last comment about helping him up was in humor.

Again, not advocating anything. You will also note I said FIRST that the coach should alert the refs to a blocking situation.

It reminds me of a situation with my older relatives when I was a teenager. We would play driveway ball against the 30-somethings. The first time we (my brother and I) challenged my older cousins, I drove to the hoop to stuff on him and he bodied me so hard - no arm contact at all - that it knocked me into the grass. I jumped up and yelled "Hey, that was a foul!!!" He replied, Yep, I guess you're right, your ball over there." I never drove on him again. :D

I eon't think Nevada said it didn't happen. I think he said it's illegal. NBA plays aren't generally relevant to discussions here. This particular thread, eg, is regarding HS rules.

Gotta admit, that does sound more like a threat than I was hoping. No player should be contemplating physical violence


If you mean that literally, yea, the best refs better catch that! It's illegal and stupid.
If refs miss that kind of thing, they'll be back to JH in a flash.

The best refs out there do catch way more than half of it, or they don't keep their positions. The ref's job is to stop this kind of crap.

Coach should notify refs? No, refs should see the plays, and call the illegal blocks. Coaches should coach their players how to legally increase their opportunities to score and their skills in doing so.

Physical hazards for playing <b>legal</b> defense? Physical hazards?

You answered my question. You're not an official. You may masquerade as one occasionally but you're not an official.

Just another rec league warrior. Seen a million of 'em.....

Ok, now lets talk rules. Much better. According to the original post, the defender was not giving proper time and distance to the player in several instances he mentioned. That is a block, not a legal defense. Don't twist the situation to make it fit your point.

What usually happens on hard blocks or charges???

Quote from OP, please?

Ok, if you say so.

Hate to break it to you, but the defender has every right to that place on the court, not you (the offensive player).


4-23-1 . . . Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent. There is no minimum distance required between the guard and opponent, but the maximum is 6 feet when closely guarded. Every player is entitled to a spot on the playing court provided such player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent.


What you espouse is thuggery and has no place in HS athletics.

PS Starting to wonder: MeRef = Old School ?

You, of course, in your violent and hazardous world have a complete view of the world...:rolleyes:

I thought this thread was about JH ball and HS rules??

4.7.1 applies here if we use reasoned judgment that as the game was progressing that A1 was not letting B move and B contact A1 who was an inch away. "Blocking is illegal personal contact which impedes the progress of an opponent with OR WITHOUT the ball."

"...facing him and staring right in his face. Player B had no room to even take a step forward. On one free throw, player B went to the opposite end and player A continued to shadow him and get in his face....

MeReF -- Doesn't sound like there's any mention of not leaving time or distance. The question was whether close guarding is allowed even when the guarding team is on offense. There's no mention of contact, or cutting in. If you as the guarded player get physical in this situation, the foul is going to be on you. Gauze in the nose, as you reference, or the guard falling to the ground, and I might call it intentional. NO REF is gonna miss that kind of contact. Unbelievable....

Like I said, my comments were from a college player's perspective and I should have more clearly stated that. However, when I said "I", I thought you knew I was speaking from MY older vantagepoint.

Note the word ILLEGAL. Staring in the face is not illegal. Hello....

Your older vantage point as a player, not a ref. I hope before I ref one of your games you identify yourself to me. I will want to know who to keep a very, very close eye on.

You call a foul every time a body hits the floor or a guy holds his nose? Reallly? You are able to see that EVERY time?? Plueesse.

Where is the contact that is illegal? A1 is an inch away - that seems to indicate no contact. If B1 tries to get around A1, and A1 holds or blocks him to prevent B1's getting around him, then it should be a foul call.

Where does the OP say that the defensive player made illegal contact?

Sorry, but you're wrong. Once the defender establishes LGP he may move to maintain it. He may also be as close as possible without causing contact.

Yup, just another rec league warrior with the ol' macho rec league attitude. Same old, same old.:rolleyes:

Waste of time arguing with this one, folks. He'll never get it.

Right, but as usual, we're making sure that other lurkers do get it clearly. Thanks to MeRef for giving us a chance to spell this one out clearly.

Correct, this thread does call for a little bit of extrapolation unless these guys think the players are stationary the whole game. it is reasonable to assume that illegal contact will eventually occur when "Player B had no room to even take a step forward.". All one has to do is envison a cut back to the left and running into the defender or the defender cutting him off and creating contact.

I guess if we can't extrapolate the OP then we are done.

NO, I don't call a foul every time a body hits the fllor, but when there's a close guard I am watching closely to see what causes that body to fall on the floor. If I see you "running through" Or putting your "arms held high", believe me, if you cause that fall, I'll see it and I'll call it. And knowin g your attitude, I might very well call it intentional. Pulleeezzz (note spelling).

And we've all advocated calling that when it happens. No one has said to let it go. Why does that allow the guarded player to run through the guard?

Whatever. I can tell you never picked up a ball in your life. At least I've PLAYED the game and actually seen the good, bad and ugly. 2,100 points later I'd say I have a better appreciation than you for the game.

I've seen a million of you pedantic officials. What old folks home are you at?

LOL!! Standard response to obviously true criticism -- deflect the attention away from your own shortcomings.

This is a site for refs to learn how to be better refs. SOme of us played, some didn't. You don't have to play at all to be a very good ref. 2100 points scored in your lifetime doesn't give you diddly qualifications to discuss reffing. At least not with refs. There are a number of good fan and player and coach sites on the internet. You'll get more sympathy there.

For any officials reading Rec League Ronny's words above, please note that a defensive player after establishing a legal guarding position does not have to give a step to an opponent from the front. They can get as close as they want, short of touching. Everything mentioned in the last sentence above would be either a PC or TC foul on B if the contact was between the defender's shoulders.

Rec League Ronny very obviously does not how the applicable rules work.

Yup, you played the game. If you say so. Unfortunately, this is an officials' web site. We officiate the game.

You're obviously in the wrong place.

Thanks you for the many responses. I agree 100% about the closely guarded and screening interpretations mentioned here. My thoughts were more toward unsportsmanlike conduct. It was taunting in my opinion; especially during dead balls, free throws, and while Team A was on offense. I would have backed him up at least a step to remove all appearance of taunting.

The tactic did work, however. B1, normally a 20+ ppg was held to 13. The chemistry of Team B was totally out of whack. They lost by a significant margin.

He stayed on him during dead balls? Yea, I'd have done something about that. I'm not sure what. I'd have to see it to know for sure.

I would have simply moved him back and explained to the coach that this particular posture has no place in the game. I would reference 10-3-7-C. Just because a situation is legal doesn't meant that it is appropriate or sportsmanlike. For example, it is legal to save a ball and throw it off of the opponents face but it is more sporting and appropriate to save it off his leg. It is a judgment call by the official. This would apply in this situation as well, IMO.

Boy, I don't know Rev. Not having seen the play myself, I can't say for sure, but I don't know that you can call anything on this kind of play during play. I think legal defense, even stifling, is different from saving the ball off someone's face. I would definitely back the guy during game stoppages (not the dead balls after made baskets). But this kind of defense, played legally, is just great basketball. If you really feel that something needs to be done, just carefully don't miss any illegal contact, and call it all. But I don't see how you can require him to back up from playing legally, however close.

Why? Got any rules support that says that he has to back off when the ball is dead?
I wouldn't even think of instructing the player to move away. That's not my duty. The player may find the defender's constant presence annoying, but it certainly is not illegal, and furthermore that's exactly the defender's job.

BTW I had this exact situation last year in the regular season finale. The coach's instruction was for his guy to follow his man everywhere on the court and stay right in front of him.
I simply let the defender know that he couldn't cause contact and that he would be watched closely, and then told the offensive player that we were keeping on eye on it and that he needed to keep his composure and take the tight marking as a compliment. Both guys were cool about it the whole game.

Your extrapolation needs work. That's a foul on the offensive player. :p

The fact is that you have no clue about how to ajudicate this situation under the rules.

Hmmm... I don't know, Nevada. It would think it comes pretty close to unsportsmanlike to be literally in the other player's face during dead balls. I suppose it would also depend how everyone was handling it.

But it's certainly NOT the defender's job to be guarding during play stoppages. After a whistle while ref is reporting, beckoning subs, etc. why should the defender be "working"? Staying near enough to be able to defend when the time comes, I can see that. But not closely guarding when there's not any game happening.

My point is please show me something which says that he can't. ;)

MeRef:

There are not now, nor have there ever been any NCAA Div. I-AA basketball teams. There are only Div. 1 basketball teams.

MTD, Sr.

Maybe he played football? 2100 points is a lot in football!

Dare I say, Diebleresque?

In my experience with this type of defensive tactic, if you try to play nose to nose with anybody all over the court, he/she will back door you to death.

Are you saying that if the players are standing next to another player in between FTs is unsportsmanlike? And what about right after a basket? These two examples are clearly dead ball situations. If that is unsportsmanlike in your opinion, you are just making it up because a player gets frustrated. You will not find a single interpretation that supports that.

Once again, unless the player is saying something or making contact, I do not see anything wrong with this. Just because you do not like it does not mean you can start calling something unsportsmanlike because you do not see it often. This is not a very solid way of thinking if you ask me. Officials should not be looking for stuff to call because we do not like it.

Peace

No. I'm talking about those times when the players are just milling about, catching their breath, conferring with each other, headed to their next position. Ref is reporting a foul, maybe talking to partner, calling in subs. That's why I started calling it a stoppage of play.

I already said I wasn't specifically talking about the dead ball after a made basket.

No, and I said specifically I wouldn't automatically call it unsportsmanlike, just that I'd be watching pretty closely.

I'm not calling it unsportsmanlike just because I don't like it. It seems as though it might be close to taunting to be closely guarding during a stoppage of play. THere's no reason for it. It is confrontive and aggressive to be this close and it's not appropriate when there's no basketball action going on. Nevada said it's the player's job to guard, but it's not anyone's job when the game isn't going forward. guarding when there's nothing to guard isn't part of the equation. If it's not done very, very carefully, I think it could be taunting and should not be allowed. Not automatically, but possibly unsportsmanlike.

I agree and I'm not doing that.

Nothing specifically says he can't do this particular action, but there are a lot of actions that aren't specifically described that you'd stop someone from doing.

I'm envisioning a stoppage of play when the refs are reporting a foul, conferring with the table maybe, calling in subs, players are milling around. A1 is as close to B2 as white on rice that whole time. I'm seeing less than six inches of blue sky between them the whole time. The one guy right in front of the other. Can you imagine the guarded person just ignoring this? It's just really, really borderline in my opinion, and there's no reason for it. It certainly would require close attention.

That's what I was thinking when I figured this tactic could easily backfire, if a coach knows what the hell he's doing, and if a player is really that good. Unless the defender is reminiscent of a young Gary Payton, you really can't play good defense that closely.

What are players supposed to be doing while an official is reporting a foul? Preparing for the next play, right?

Now granted this is a bit different, but different does not equate to illegal. Don't penalize someone for using a tactic that is a strange.

The strangeness is exactly what could make it effective. People are thrown off by things that are different. If the defender's tactic can make the opponent uncomfortable, then perhaps this could benefit his team. Perhaps the opponent will lose mental focus and not shoot as well.

If you are ever encountered with this defensive tactic, as I was, I would hope that you would watch it closely, but not deem it in and of itself illegal. Allow the coaches and players to be creative with their tactics. What you may see as annoying or irksome, another may consider clever. The NFHS book says that cleverness is encouraged right in the front in the Intent and Purpose of the Rules.

For me, the NOTE: on 10-3-7-C would be enough to back him up. In my opinion, A1 crossed the line when he was "nose-to-nose" with B1. He was not just "near him" as has been stated; he was literally in his face at all times, similar to how a drill instructor gets in the face of a new recruit. If he'd stuck his tongue out we would have had contact.

He was, IMO, trying to embarrass, ridicule, and demean, the opponent.

Well, as I've said all the way along, I think I'd have to see it to be certain. But it sounds to me as though the "tactic" is a legitimate basketball strategy during play, and not legitimate during stoppages. I'm also wondering about the level of play. RevRef? Was it JH girls? Or varsity boys? College? Just wondering.

But your comment about cleverness requires some response. It's certainly clever and not specifically forbidden to stand in the opponent's huddle during a TO. Do you think that's acceptable? What if the guarded player was trying to have a quick huddle with floor teammates during a stoppage and the guarding player kept worming into the middle to maintain his nose-to-nose stance? Would you allow that?

This happened to me the other night

B1 fouls A1 kinda hard, team A was asking me for an intentional, they didn't get it. I'm C for the freethrows and as we're setting up A2 walks over to me and we start talking. B1 follows and stands right next to me. I asked him what he wanted and he said he just wanted to hear what was being said.

What do you do now?

We used this tactic when I was asst coach for an 8th grade girls team. Their best player was killing us in the first half. Second half, we just put our biggest forward on their high scorer and shadowed her wherever she went on the court (not during dead balls and such though). It worked great. The girl was frustrated as hell and scored only 4 pts the rest of the game, which we won.

In this case, I'd let him listen. It's just an explanation of the call. If I was having a l'il "heart-to-heart" with a player over something though, I might shoo the other player away and keep the original <i>tete-a-tete</i> just between the two involved parties. JMO.

Rev,

That all sounds wonderful, but your logic sounds like something I would expect from a younger, inexperienced, lower level official that has never or rarely gets varsity or college assignments. I have no idea what your background is in officiating and what you are used to working. But you do not see any people that claim to work high levels saying your ruling makes a lot of sense. Even your rules reference has no interpretation that backs that up that way of thinking. I run a new officials class for my association and this is the kind of question that I expect to come from them. They are not used to being around the game and they are not used to enforcing rules so they ask questions that many that have experience would roll their eyes about.

I have no problem with you asking the question, but to try to justify it with a very shady interpretation is where I have the problem. I know we talk a lot about the "old boy networks" and other systems where people get assignments or lose assignments based on who you know. But I can personally tell you that more people lose opportunities because they call things that despite their good intentions are not widely accepted and lose opportunities as a result of "making stuff up" because the individual thinks they are doing the right thing. Standing next to someone is not illegal. And we should not be making calls because a player is frustrated by a legal act. That is not very good officiating in my opinion.

Peace

If that happens, you should tell them to get a room. ;)

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

http://www.cnn.com/SHOWBIZ/seinfeld/...ings.wrong.jpg

Agree. The worst thing you can you is try to apply your own personal dislikes and bias towards situations that arise during a game. Just because you personally don't like what's happening doesn't make it illegal. We all run into players and coaches that just grate on our nerves, personality-wise, but we have to treat them exactly the same as everybody else.

Okay, let me be sure I understand what you're saying, JR and JR.

It's okay for A1 to dog B1, staying within 6 inches, for an entire two or three hour period, as long as it takes for the game to process, as long as LGP is maintained and there's only incidental contact. That's your stand?

What would you say to B1 if he commented to you that he didn't like it?

DO you draw the line at TO's and half-time? If B1 is trying to talk to a teammate, and A1 is hovering, you wouldn't back A1 off?

So far I'm just asking where you draw the line. But I'm also thinking...

This wouldn't be legal on the street, it would be stalking. Why is it okay on the bball court?

I'm neither JR nor JR, and I've been pretty much an interested spectator for this thread. But, I have some thoughts.

First, I wouldn't back A1 off if B1 is talking to a teammate. All B1 has to do is turn around and his back is then to A1, and if B2 is standing there, A1 can't get right back in front of him without fouling.

As for where the line is, it's certainly beyond that for me.

And, the "legal on the street" issue definitely doesn't apply. If I go down the street setting screens and boxing people out, that's not going to be legal, either. :D

Wow. I gotta admit I'm surprised, since this seems pretty obvious to me. But I also know that I do tend to be pretty bossy and overbearing. I always want everyone to be very polite and respectful and I don't understand why it's okay to not do that. But I guess if everyone disagrees with me on this, I'll bow to the experience and majority of y'all. I'm also fairly certain I"ll never see this.

I also want to add that this would be a much easier discussion if we could actually watch this happen. I do think there are times when a player could go beyond acceptable into unsporting attitude. Level of play also would play a part here. That's why I've been interested in all the responses - there is certainly credence in a number of the different views here.

Ahh, so if I back down a little then you will too?? lol I'll remember that...

Okay, well, I guess I'm see that part that goes beyond acceptable and you're seeing the other possibilities. I've been saying all along that it's gonna depend a little on the situation, level of play, how the different people handle it, etc.

Yep, agree with all that!

Juulie, with all due respect, I bet it was not as bad as it was made out to be. For one I doubt that a sweaty kid wants to stay that close to another sweaty kid for that period of time. Secondly if a game takes 2 or 3 hours then that is a problem beyond this situation that was being described. And if there are timeouts and quarter breaks, this would not apply either. Let us put this in a little perspective.

Play basketball. ;)

What rule could I tell the player to back off? Unless there is some contact during this action, there is not much I can do. Now if I know a player is frustrated, I might watch them closer, but I am not calling anything if there is no contact what so ever. I would think if someone was that close, there might be some contact at some point. Then I will address it accordingly.

What rule could I tell the player to back off? Unless there is some contact during this action, there is not much I can do. Now if I know a player is frustrated, I might watch them closer, but I am not calling anything if there is no contact what so ever. I would think if someone was that close, there might be some contact at some point. Then I will address it accordingly.

Running into someone on the street would also not be legal; it might be assault and battery. Do we call assault and battery on a PC foul or an illegal screen? Of course we do not. This situation did not take place o the street. This is in a game that has rules as well. I do not think that analogy is a good one.

Peace

Well, I think that's part of the question. RevRef said it looked to him as though it was intimidation, taunting, etc. You think maybe he's exaggerating? But what if he's not would that change your opinion?

It's not an analogy at all. It's a literal question. If I were walking around downtown doing errands, paying bills, buying groceries, etc, and some guy were walking along next to me the whole time, no contact, no verbiage, staying within 6 inches, never letting up, never backing off, well I'd make one of my stops the police station.

Now if I'm playing basketball and the game is going forward, I have agreed that the rules for "personal space" aren't the same, and I'm gonna have to put up with someone dogging me.

But when the game isn't going forward, and there's really nothing for that person to gain in terms of basketball, why are the normal "personal space" rules now suspended?

I'm not arguing as a way to be obnoxious, just sort of exploring a philosophical question.

I cannot think of an example of anything one player does being against the rules because another player does not like it.

So how would you word that?

When we tell stories about situations we witness, we tend to include things that apart of the story that might not actually be completely true. This is especially true when we are trying to justify our position (I am guilty as anyone in telling stories like this). I also think that the fact that the OPer is a Reverend and you are a compassionate woman also shades your opinions. I am just telling you there is no rule that prohibits this on the surface. You also have to work the game and this is why you get paid the big bucks to make those decisions. But you are not going to change my mind that this is inherently illegal or that something must be done. I guess I would have to be there, but I would guess that based on what games I have been around, this would be hard to accomplish for a team without sacrificing a lot of other things in the process. Essentially you are taking away a player from your team to just cover one player so close. And I really do not know how someone can be that close and not have any contact without bordering on illegal contact.

Once again that is a bad analogy. Standing that close to someone off the court does not necessarily have a purpose. Guarding a player in a small box (the court) does have a purpose. I do not know if I would be following anyone around that closely (that was not my spouse or significant other) walking on the street, let alone during a game.

Yes, or do not play sports.

I did not take your comments as arguing. I am just trying to help you see how out of place that thinking is in the context of a sport. I can see football would be a real problem for you then. :D

Peace

Logic is not the issue here. We are asked to make calls based upon clearly stated rules and to exercise our best judgment in interpreting those rules. Had I been working this game, I would have judged that A1 was acting in an unsporting manner and, at the least, had him get out of B1's face. I wasn't working the game so that is a mute point.

I am 44 yrs old and not a young, immature beginner. I am used to working HS varsity (8 yrs) - no college. Regardless of the level, unsporting conduct should not be allowed.

I believe that the rule I referenced very clearly supported what would have been my decision had I been working the game.

Agreed, and if this was the extent of it, I'd have no problem whatsoever.

Agreed again. However, when a player is trying to intimidate another player, it is time to intervene. Had you been there, I'm sure that you would feel the same. The defensive posture taken by A1 was unnecessary an unsporting.

I would say that it would be poor officiating to allow it to this degree. The game was very clearly getting out of hand based upon the atmosphere that this one defender had created.

Peace[/QUOTE]

It was a tater-tot and I did shoo B1 away. I have to admit though that when he said he was there to just listen to what was being said about him I was a bit annoyed.

I tend to agree (if I'm picturing the same thing I think you're describing). If a person is doing this in a dead ball, it's unsportsmanlike. First a talk, then a T. That sort of stuff is the fuel for a fight.

And that is a judgment you will just have to make. I bet if a coach complained to your assignor about it or the school assigned the game, they might think your judgment is a stretch. Also what level was this game?

Based on what you have just listed, you have not achieved the level of accomplishment to have such a strong opinion about something that is not supported by the rules. And yes, it would matter based on the level as to how your ruling would be accepted. I can name a few varsity coaches that would do everything in their power to not have you work their games if they knew the rules on this issue. I would be careful to say that this applies at all levels. Just an opinion, take it or leave it.

Well it is not me you have to convince. But to say something that is not put in any "official" interpretation or is not even addressed, is not "very clearly supported" if you ask me. And just like a judge in lower court, our decisions are often reviewed and heavily scrutinized. And if you make a ruling that is not supported, it is very likely someone will have a say in the future as to your ability to work similar games in the future.


Standing next to someone is not illegal. And if someone blocks a shot and throws it into the 3rd row, that could be seen as intimidation as well. I would hope you would not call a foul based on the fact a little guard might be afraid of going to the lane based on that intimidation?


And I would think it would be very poor to call something only supported by a personal opinion. There is not a single interpretation that even suggests this is illegal. If they change that I would at least go along with you on this. At this time there is no support for that. Basketball is not a love fest. There are things that are going to happen that will not make players happy. That does not make them illegal.

Peace

How would you word what?

RevRef:

If what you are saying is that NFHS R10-S3-A7c trumps NFHS R4-S23 when it comes to playing defense and NFHS R4-S40 when it comes to setting screens, then I suggest that you reread the Sections 23 (guarding) and 40 (screening) of Rule 4. You will see that R10-S3-A7c has nothing to do with these sections. Let A1 play defense and set screens and use R4-S23 and R4-S40 be your guide. The situations that are covered by R10-S3-A7c are far and few between compared with players playing defense and setting screens.

I agree with Rut, your suggested use of R10-S3-A7c suggest to me that you are not a very experienced official in both rules knowledge and application of the rules. That is the observation that you will recieve from many of us bald old geezers that do have that experience and knowledge.

MTD, Sr.

P.S. Go BROWNS!!

Not coming down on one side or the other, but there is at least one instance of when the penalty for a player's actions is affected by the opponent's reaction.

Taunting, for example. If a shot blocker gets in the face of the shooter and starts taunting him, and the shooter hauls off and clocks him, we've got flagrants on both.

Or, even a hard personal foul that might otherwise be classed intentional could be escalated to flagrant if it results in a fight.

Friend, you can say that it has no support by the rules all day long, but the fact of the matter is, it does have support. 10-3-7-C clearly states that it is unsporting to "bait" or "taunt" your opponent. The case book on 10-3-7 clearly states that the official must make a decision on unsporting behavior. The posture taken by A1 most definitely was unsporting in my opinion.

If A's coach complains to the assignor, then B's coach's praises would offset the complaint. When it comes to the safety of the kids on the court, my thoughts are not on losing opportunities in the future; my thoughts are controlling the game at hand.

I'm a big gal, but not so big that you need to refer to me in the plural!

So, let me get this straight? The majority opinion here is that a player may, during all dead ball situations, attempt to intimidate his opponent by acting as if he's playing belly-to-belly defense. As long as no contact is made, this is acceptable?

Yet, a player who comes out and guards the officials as some sort of joke gets a technical foul?

Personally, the tactic as described by the OP seems to be an obvious attempt to intimidate. This seems to be a pretty clear example of someone gaining an advantage not intended by the rules.

Knowing that I'd have to see it to be sure; it sounds like an unsporting T to me; such as B1 standing outside A's huddle during a timeout.

If you tell a player to get out of another player's face - even though they aren't doing anything illegal by rule - when do you allow the player to get back in the player's face?

1. How close can they be?
2. When can they start playing defense?
3. How long do they have to move away once the ball becomes dead?
4. Do they have to move away during the time the ball passes through the net, hits the floor and is at the disposal of the inbounder?

In other words, how do you determine what you will allow during your officiating/coaching?
Do you (anyone can answer) say something and/or give a T for every other type of unsporting act? BTW, what would you say if the coach challenges you for telling his/her player for moving away?

I also want to add that I am not trying to ridicule you Rev. I am only trying to let you see the bigger picture. Just because you work some varsity does not mean you are at the same level of other officials working those games. I know I am not at the level of other varsity and college officials. I am starting to get that way on the varsity level and I have worked post-season games, but I would not call myself as the without a doubt "top official" in most conferences I work. I am at the point of my career that people question my motives when I work a lower level game. And it took some time to get there.

One way to guarantee you will not work advance to the point where you only work varsity and people start to really question why you work lower level games is not to make calls that is not well supported by the rules. If in this case there were words between the players then this is a different issue. But standing next to someone all by itself is not illegal. And the fact that you keep defending this does not add to what people might think about your ability or experience. I would tell you that if you said this to a room full of veterans, I would bet despite your experience people would be wondering how you got this ruling from. I know officials that have eliminated opportunities by what they say in meetings. I say this because we talk so much about the "old boy network" but we almost never focus on the way people perceive us because of how we call the game and this kind of call would raise some eyebrows if you fully explained your reasoning.

Peace

It sounds as though the Rev isn't talking about standing next to someone. He's talking about being in their face. No, there's not a rule about that per se, but it's easy to see how it might be construed as taunting, which is illegal, and is up to a judgment. It feels to me as though you aren't seeing the sitch the way the Rev saw it.

He's also not exactly just defensively denying you, but trying to explain the circumstances better. That's just good communication.

Legitimate questions.
1. If it's not something that looks and smells and walks like intimidation.... Follow him around, but when I'm reporting fouls, or when we're shooting intentional foul free throws, or he's on his way to the bench for a TO, or he's going to the water fountain; good grief. We're smart enough people to know when the defender is just trying to intimidate the offensive player.

2. When play is imminent. Until then, normal personal space rules apply.

3 and 4. Look, this is a judgment issue. Is B1 strictly trying to intimidate his opponent? If it's close, let it go. If it's obviously intimidation, it's a non-basketball play.

I've done something like this in a game. There was a guy killing us and I made it my mission to take away his daylight to shoot. I wasn't saying anything or doing anything except being real close to him. How is that baiting or taunting?

Baiting - To entice, especially by trickery or strategy.
Taunting - To reproach in a mocking, insulting, or contemptuous manner

It isn't baiting or taunting during the play, while ball is live, while clock is running. It gets a lot more marginal when the ball is dead, subs are going in and out, ref is reporting foul, etc. That's the specific sitch we're discussing.