|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
As to whether or not the contact was flagrant ... again judgment call. I think if the physicality of the game had been escalating up to this point, I think I would toss the defensive player. If this play was out of character for the game, then I can see calling the intentional foul. Regardless, I am going to huddle with my partners, sort everything out, then give explanations to both coaches and get on with the game.
__________________
I only wanna know ... |
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
For sake of argument, let's say the coach dropped the f-bomb on the trail in the video. Trail raises hand, blows whistle, T-signal. Now trail has to determine whether or not shooting motion started before f-bomb. If I were trail in this case, and that was the defensive coach, it appears in the video as though some kind of shot was immenent, so I'd hold off for a second for the offense to get a shot, wait to see if it goes - to avoid any timing confusion, then blow my whistle and bang him with a T. If that coach is on the offense, I blow my whistle immediately, wave off the shot, and throw the T. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
WITHHOLD WHISTLE 10.4.1 SITUATION E: A1 is driving toward the basket for an apparent goal when the official, while trailing the play advancing in the direction in which the ball is being advanced, is cursed by the head coach of Team B. How should the official handle this situation? RULING: The official shall withhold blowing the whistle until A1 has either made or missed the shot. The official shall then sound the whistle and assess the Team B head coach with a technical foul. If the official judges the act to be flagrant, the coach shall be ejected and shall leave the vicinity of the playing area and have no further contact (direct or indirect) with the team. If A's coach was the offender, the whistle shall be sounded immediately when the unsporting act occurs. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
I only wanna know ... |
|
|||
Quote:
As for the contact... It is certainly not flagrant. If we ignore the T for a moment, how many would call that contact intentional had it occurred in isolation. I'm sure there are a few, and perhaps several, here that would only call a common foul. It is arguable that the contact could be ignored if the ball is dead.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association |
|
|||
Quote:
Art. 36 Unsportsmanlike foul 36.1 Definition 36.1.1 An unsportsmanlike foul is a player contact foul which, in the judgement of the official, is not a legitimate attempt to directly play the ball within the spirit and intent of the rules. 36.2 Penalty 36.2.1 An unsportsmanlike foul shall be charged against the offender. 36.2.2 Free throw(s) shall be awarded to the player who was fouled, followed by: • A throw-in at the centre line extended, opposite the scorer’s table. • A jump ball at the centre circle to begin the first period. The number of free throws shall be as follows: • If the foul is committed on a player not in the act of shooting: two (2) free throws will be awarded. • If the foul is committed on a player in the act of shooting: the goal, if made, shall count and, in addition, one (1) free throw will be awarded. • If the foul is committed on a player in the act of shooting who fails to score: two (2) or three (3) free throws will be awarded. I can't give you a good case for this becuse I can't find one, how ever, the key is that if there is a dead ball and there is a continious play like in this video. You ignore personal fouls due to the dead ball, but if the foul is a T, U or D then you must call it. Therefore this is an unsportmanlike foul charged on the defence, the player who were fouled will attempt 3 FT's for this foul since he was trying for 3 points. I can't find the rules quote regarding dead ball fouls either I'm afraid... I'll keep looking though
__________________
All posts I do refers to FIBA rules |
|
|||
Everything that crazyvoyager just posted above is for FIBA and does NOT apply to NFHS or NCAA. Those rules are completely different. So for any NFHS or NCAA officials, we must ignore everything that he wrote. Doesn't mean that he is wrong, he's just working under a different system.
For starters the contact foul would NOT be an unsporting foul in NFHS play. By definition an unsporting foul is a noncontact foul under NFHS rules. Secondly, once the ball is dead a try for goal cannot be started. Therefore, the contact could only be deemed an intentional technical foul or a flagrant technical foul and would result in only 2 FTs. Lastly to answer Camron's question, I believe that only an incompetent official would deem this action a common foul. It is clearly excessive contact. |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|