Tapping an airborne shooter
 

District 1A playoff...Team A down by 12 with 3 minutes left in the game.

A1 goes up for a 3pt. shot...
B1 taps A1's leg, with his hand... in the official's judgement B1 did this on purpose to distract the airborne shooter...A1 misses the shot.

B1 has 4 fouls

Watta ya got?

1) Nuthin'

2) Foul on B1...B1 is disqualified...A1 shoots 3 FT's

3) Technical Foul on B1 for Unsportsmanlike conduct...B1 is disqualified...Team A shoots 2 FT's, with the lane cleared, and has the ball at the division line opposite the table for a Throw-in.

Rule 4-19 Article 1

A personal foul is a player foul which involves illegal contact with an opponent while the ball is live, which hinders an opponent from performing normal...offensive movements. A personal foul also includes contact by or on an airborne shooter when the ball is dead.

Rule 10-6 Article 2

A player shall not contact an opponent with his/her hand unless such contact is only with the opponents hand while it is on the ball and is incidental to an attempt to play the ball.

Under 10-6.2, I've got illegal contact. Therefore, since in the judgment of the official it hindered the opponent from performing a normal offensive movement, I've got a personal foul. We're shooting 3 FTs and B1 is DQ'ed.

B) shooting 3

defender is getting away with something if you don't call something.

One of the oldest plays around. It's right up there with the little nudge on the hip, the quick finger in the stomach and the little tap on the shooter's elbow. You have to call all of 'em because all of 'em can affect the shot. And in this case, A1 did miss the shot.

Door #2.

You can't call a technical foul by rule because there was contact during a live ball.

Yep, I had this happen the other night...

#2 is what I called...no complaints...and got a little snicker out of the player who thought he would get away with it.

Thanks JR...just generating a little discussion on some plays...maybe I'll have some video in the near future.

Just Asking ......
 

Even if you consider the contact incidental, but unsportsmanlike?

Just playing the Devil's advocate. I would call a personal foul here.

If it's incidental, it can't be unsportsmanlike. The two don't go together.

The contact can be deliberate and unsportsmanlike. You still have to call a personal foul of some kind though. By definition, illegal contact during a live ball can't be a "T".

Stupid Question ???
 

Agree. After posting this, and then while getting ready for work, thinking about the post, I thought, "What a stupid question", especailly since the contact was not incidental in the original post.

JurassicRefeee: Thanks for not "blasting me for the previous post.

But, at the risk of being "blasted out of the Forum", this is the only scenerio that I could come up with, very far fetched, never happen, very hypothetical: A1 has the ball in his hands for the first of two free throws (live ball). Teammate A2, on the lane line, in an unsporting manner, pulls down the shorts of B2. Why would A2 disconcert a teammate, so no disconcertion. What basketball play disadvantage would B2 be subjected to by the contact, since there was to be no rebound on thnis shot, so the contact is incidental.

Live ball. Incidental contact, no advantage. Unsporting contact act.

OK. Now I'm ready to take my "lumps". I'm off to work, so I won't read any follow up posts until tonight, so take your time. This post may be too stupid for zanyolne to respond to. I thought it up while in the shower and getting dressed, so I thought I would post it, so as not to have wasted my time.

OK, I'm ready now. "Blast away".

Look at it as the same as if A2 just turned and pushed B2 for no discernable reason. It is an unsporting act, but you can also call it an intentional personal foul on A2. It's also basically has the same result rules-wise, except for the throw-in spot, and it meets the rules definition.

Any consideration of calling a flagrant personal? I'm not letting a de-pantser (pretty sure that's not a word) stay in the game...

I guess I'm in the minority, but there's no way I'm calling a foul for a "tap" on the shooter's leg.

Hey, What about A/D? :rolleyes:

Scrapper what not? That tap can cause the shooter to return to the floor awkwardly.

The "tap" definetly, at least IMO, affected the shot....but then so does faking like you are going to "submarine" an airborne shooter with the ol' duck your head and dive at the guys privates.:rolleyes:

The difference is there was contact...the contact was not incidental...the contact was ON PURPOSE...the contact affected the shot...FOUL...at least IMHO.

Maybe I'm not picturing it correctly, but a "tap" -- like somebody tapping on your shoulder to get your attention -- is doesn't seem likely to throw off the balance of the shooter. Certainly not enough to affect his landing.