Tripping in Basketball
 

Team A Point Guard is dribbling down court on a fast break. Team B defender
is running up behind him and trips him. 2 questions here, First what foul do you
have kicking, blocking, make up your own? Second what signal is used again
kicking, blocking, make up your own? I saw this happen in the Varsity Game and
nothing was called. Was nothing called because we down have a signal or the
defense never gained a advantage because Team A recovered the loose ball.
What would be your call and signal.

Thanks for your time
Third year Referee

Probably any player that make a dribbler fall and they are behind, I am probably going to go with a push call. College mechanics actually have the "tripping" signal and you could use that appropriately. But because this sounded like a HS game that might not go over very well.

Also I have no idea why there was not a call, I was not there. Maybe the official felt there was no contact. Or maybe the official missed it. That does happen you know. ;)

Peace

B should be called for a foul here. Just because you're not sure what signal to use, you still have to call it. A push I would call.

As for why there was no whistle, I can't say as I did not talk to the officials on the game.

If it's a blatant trip, wouldn't you call that an intentional foul as well? A regular trip I would just call a push as well...

You can call an intentional foul on all kinds of things (heck, why not a flagrant foul). But let us not go that far without having some idea as to what actually happen. We are not going to get that answer by reading about it on a discussion board. :)

Peace

Knowing there is no "trip" call in HS, I always use the "push" signal. Obviously, an advantage was created, and I feel you have to call something as it usually is very obvious.

4-7-1: Blocking is illegal personal contact which impedes the progress of an opponent with or without the ball.

Tripping someone impedes his progress. Works for me.

Yea, I usually call tripping a block, but if it's from behind and there's any body contact at all, a push would work just as well. But it's a foul on the defender, even if it's just an "accident" with the feet getting inadvertently tangled. Gotta call it, though not actually seeing the OP, I can't comment on that particular play.

Personally, I'd use either the "over the back" or the "reach" mechanic. :p

Or my favorite, the creeping death mechanic I see our JV officials use when they say "over the back."

Personally, I'd eliminate all of the mechanics and just give them all 2 minutes in the penalty box for cheating.

Or...you could call a balk. :rolleyes:

A little twist
 

A1 has the ball and is dribbling up court. He dribbles past B2 who is jogging up the court and makes no real attempt at stopping A1. As A1 goes past B2 he dribbles into the direct line that B2 is jogging. As he cuts in, B2 and A1s feet obviously touch as A1 goes down to the floor like a sack of potatoes. Coach of A is crying murder! Says, "That's a call every time ref!" Foul on B2 for tripping? Or, no call as A1 was primarily responsible for the contact? We had this in a recent game and had no call. I was the trail and could not see the contact as I was screened by B2. At the next TO, we discussed and both the C and L said they didn't see the play, just heard the kid hit the court. Trip? Push? No call?

I'm sure you realize this is one of those "you'd have to be there" decisions, but on the surface, this is what it sounds like to me:

http://www.z-news.com/archives/12010...im-no_call.gif

No call ... but, what about a foul on A1? Maybe not with the way the contact was described, but what if he plows into the side of B2?

If he goes to the floor with ball in possesion - you could have a travel!

This is an easy call. Under both NFHS, NCAA, and FIBA rules this is a blocking foul by A1 for not giving time and distance in setting a screen against a moving B2. The foul is a player control foul.

MTD, Sr.

Yep.

10.6.7 SITUATION: During congested play in the free-throw semicircle, B1 and B2 are less than 3 feet apart when dribbler A1 fakes to one side and then causes contact in attempting to dribble between them. RULING: Unless one of the defensive players is faked out of position to permit adequate space for the dribbler to go between without making contact, it is a player-control foul on A1. COMMENT: Screening principles apply to the dribbler who attempts to cut off an opponent who is approaching in a different path from the rear. In this case, the dribbler must allow such opponent a maximum of two steps or an opportunity to stop or avoid contact. When both the dribbler and the opponent are moving in exactly the same path and same direction, the player behind is responsible for contact which results if the player in front slows down or stops. (4-7-2)

I remember way back when I was a kid and a point guard, I drew three fouls this way against the defense. It worked once, so I managed to make it happen twice more that game. Lucky for me the refs were wrong.

It's amazing how many times they travel when trying to split two defenders.

I wouldn't know how to award a base, though. When I give them 2 minutes for cheating, I make them stand in the opponents' coaching box.

BTW, the cheating mechanic is saying "tsk-tsk" while brushing one index finger over the other.

I remember this story from Joe Garagiola's book "Baseball is a Funny Game"

The first base coach is pleading with the umpire that the pitcher was balking. The umpire does not agree. Finally the coach says "That move is at least half a balk" The umpire says "OK..you win...I'll send your runner half way to second base!"

Ok...here is what I am seeing....help me out here...

B1 is running directly down the center of the court toward the hoop chasing
A1 who is dirbbling (say 2 steps in front of and 2 steps to B1's right)...A1's move into B1's line that creates contact from behind by B1.

A) When allowing B1 two steps and then contact occurs, this is a block/push on B1

and

B) When allowing B1 only 1 step when the contact occurs...would be a player control foul on A1 (because of the screening elements for time and distance) MTD said a block, but since the A1 has the ball, it's PC.

correct

Is there anywhere that says allowing one or two steps or is what is judged to be the appropriate amount for the play at hand.

This is very interesting and something I did not know. We teach our kids when they beat a man off the dribble in the open court to move in front of the defender to cut off the angle and make them go through you. What I'm hearing is that if they successfully do that, and get ahead of the player, it's OK. But, if in the process, or before they get two steps in front, contact is made, then it's a foul on the dribbler. Correct?

By the way, I have never seen this called on the dribbler unless the cutover move included an extended arm or elbow. As such, I would be hesitant to teach my players to "trip" a dribbler that is trying to cut over on them.

The two steps refers to guarding a moving opponent without the ball. To obtain a legal guarding position on an opponent with the ball, or a stationary opponent without the ball, no time or distance is required.

Really? For getting their feet tangled?

__________________________

You're going to use the block signal if he trips the opponent from the back?:confused:

It's not defensive pass interference if the defender looks back for the ball and the feet get tangled and both go down. Wrong sport.

If feet get tangled and one player is a dribbler, yup, it's a foul. How did the feet get tangled?

Zakman:

Sure. Why not? What else could it be?

MTD, Sr.

Coach:

You have never had me officiate one of your games. :D

MTD, Sr.

Maybe we are envisioning different scenarios, but if dribbler A1 cuts off a defender, the only contact between them is tangling of feet and A1 is the only player to hit the floor, I can't imagine calling a foul on A1. Now, if A1 isn't the player that is creating the contact, then I agree with you that it's a foul.

If A is the only player to hit the ground and the contact didn't cause B a disadvantage, then it's a perfect example of a no-call...

Why not? It fits as well or better than any other signal we have.

Um, lemme see if I got this right. A1 created the contact by cutting off the defender and tangling feet. You can't imagine calling a foul on A1. But if B1 creates the contact, you say that it is a foul? My question is "A foul on who- A1 or the defender?"

Follow-up question--"If you say that the foul is on A1, what's your rationale for giving a foul to a player who did <b>not</b> initiate the contact?

Follow-up follow-up question--If you say that the foul is on B1, what is your rationale for calling a foul on B1 for initiating contact, but you wouldn't call a foul on A1 for initiating contact in the initial scenario?

Defender, when A1 is put at a disadvantage.

My rationale is that B1 isn't responsible for creating a disadvantage in the initial scenario.

I am now officially totally confused.

http://1000smilies.com/animated/surrendering.gif

When I read the thread title, for some reason I thought it would be about Bill Walton. ;)