Foul or No Call?

[bigda65]

A1 has ball in frontcourt. Player dribbles 100 mph and wildly through the lane. He loses the ball and continues through the lane and stumbles ( probably two or three more steps without the ball, then stumbled).
It looked like he crossbody checked the defensive forward and knocked him down.

I could not tell if he stepped on someones foot or not, or would it even matter?

PC Foul on Team A1 or a no call ?

[mick]

Originally Posted by bigda65

A1 has ball in frontcourt. Player dribbles 100 mph and wildly through the lane. He loses the ball and continues through the lane and stumbles ( probably two or three more steps without the ball, then stumbled).
It looked like he crossbody checked the defensive forward and knocked him down.

I could not tell if he stepped on someones foot or not, or would it even matter?

PC Foul on Team A1 or a no call ?

If the ball was still loose. I have a TC on Team A.

[jdw3018]

First, if he lost the ball on the way into the lane, then it can't be a PC foul.

Second, it all depends on what happened with the ball, what kind of contact there was, etc. It doesn't sound like stepping on a foot or not had much to do with it if he was out of control. If the ball went OOB before the contact, then you most likely have a no-call, because your only other option is an intentional technical foul. If the player he ran into had no shot at the ball, wouldn't have been in position to defend a player from A who got the ball, and the contact wasn't severe, I'd probably lean toward a no call. If the contact was severe or B1 was put at a disadvantage in either getting the ball or in defending the player who did get the ball, then I've got a foul on A1.

If calling a foul, it would be a common foul, which may or may not be a TC foul based on what happened with the ball after he lost it and before contact was made.

Edit: Important note - if this is a bang-bang play and the contact would have been an easy PC foul if the player still had the ball, it probably should be called here, though it would be a TC foul if the ball hadn't been gathered by B.

[Splute]

wow, lots of assumptions here. One he lost the ball without being fouled, two, an opponent has not gained control of the ball before the crossbody check, and three you deem the contact by A1 on B not incidental.

since he does not have the ball it can not be Player Control, so as Mick says may be Team control depending on assumptions above.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bigda65

A1 has ball in frontcourt. Player dribbles 100 mph and wildly through the lane. He loses the ball and continues through the lane and stumbles ( probably two or three more steps without the ball, then stumbled).
It looked like he crossbody checked the defensive forward and knocked him down.

I could not tell if he stepped on someones foot or not, or would it even matter?

PC Foul on Team A1 or a no call ?

TC foul or no call. If the defensive player that got schmucked had zero chance of getting to the loose ball, it could be incidental contact. It's a gotta see call.

[bigda65]

I am really not sure who wound up with the ball, I think A ended up with the ball back.

JR the player that got checked had no chance at the loose ball, as a matter of fact the Team A player was on top of him on the floor.

I just wanted to get you guys opinions. It looked really weird with the bodies on the floor and the way it happened.

There was no call on this play, fans going wild, both coaches yelling. (not that any of that means anything).

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bigda65

There was no call on this play, fans going wild, both coaches yelling. (not that any of that means anything).

Contact, even contact that might be severe, does not necessarily mean that a foul has been committed. That's exactly why you're right when you say that fans going wild and coaches yelling mean nuthin'.

Coaches and fans have both an agenda and a bias. Officials just react.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by bigda65

JR the player that got checked had no chance at the loose ball, as a matter of fact the Team A player was on top of him on the floor.

Of course he has no play on the ball of A1 is on top of him. The question is, would the player that got slammed into have had a reasonable chance to make a play on the loose ball had he not been slammed into?

[mick]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Contact, even contact that might be severe, does not necessarily mean that a foul has been committed.

Out-of-control player cross-checks an opponent to the floor.
...I think I'll go get that one.

[mick]

Originally Posted by Smitty

Of course he has no play on the ball of A1 is on top of him. The question is, would the player that got slammed into have had a reasonable chance to make a play on the loose ball had he not been slammed into?

Let's assume the defender had no chance for the loose ball, yet he has still ended up on his back due to contact.
...I don't have any question.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by mick

Let's assume the defender had no chance for the loose ball, yet he has still ended up on his back due to contact.
...I don't have any question.

It does sound like a train wreck, especially if the kid is now underneath A1 and now can't help on defense if A2, who now has control of the ball gets an easy layup. This is something that probably should have been called.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Smitty

Of course he has no play on the ball of A1 is on top of him. The question is, would the player that got slammed into have had a reasonable chance to make a play on the loose ball had he not been slammed into?

what does one have to do with the other? I guess we can throw each players right to a position on the court out the door if they dont have a reasonable chance to make a play on the ball.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by deecee

what does one have to do with the other? I guess we can throw each players right to a position on the court out the door if they dont have a reasonable chance to make a play on the ball.

What are you talking about? Not that you'll comprehend this, but the reason would be to determine if the contact was inadvertent or not. Not all contact is a foul, but I'm talking to a wall here...

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Smitty

What are you talking about? Not that you'll comprehend this, but the reason would be to determine if the contact was inadvertent or not. Not all contact is a foul, but I'm talking to a wall here...

so if the defender didnt have a chance at making a play on the ball and the offensive player who just lost position barrels into him because lets say he tripped over his own feet you would call an intentional? I just dont see why the ball has to be involved for inadvertent contact or not.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by deecee

so if the defender didnt have a chance at making a play on the ball and the offensive player who just lost position barrels into him because lets say he tripped over his own feet you would call an intentional? I just dont see why the ball has to be involved for inadvertent contact or not.

When did I mention the word "intentional" anywhere? I have no clue what you're talking about. Have you hit on any coaches lately?