Inadvertent

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by pizanno
Those of you who would call fouls: Do you also call fouls when a person gets poked in the eye, accidentally, of course.

If it places the player at a disadvantage, yes, I do. If he travels or loses the ball because of the poke, you have to call a foul. In your play, the player was knocked to the floor. You can't ignore it. If you do, there'll be hell to pay later.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by pizanno
Chuck-

The ball doesn't have to be in the inbounders hand to be at disposal, yes? Thus, can still be a live ball. Depends where the ball is.

This WAS right after the basket, and contributed to my reluctance to whistle a dead ball foul (= T) that would have been the player's fifth ("make the 5th a good one".

If you're going to consider such a period a dead ball for the purposes of allowing the scoring team to request To, then you have to consider this sitch a dead ball as well.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Bart Tyson
beep, foul

BEEP?!?!? Are you trying out one of those new digital whistles?!

[Bart Tyson]

Originally posted by rainmaker

BEEP?!?!? Are you trying out one of those new digital whistles?! [/B]

Hmmmm you just gave me an idea. Lets see, the whistle could be attached to the shirt, voice activated.

[crew]

wow, i like how everyone is discussing this. i personally would call a common foul, it sucks but this could lead to retaliation later in the game.
as the glancing punch was landed i would blow my whistle and just hold up my fist with no type of signal(common foul in mind).i would then watch the reaction of the punched player.
if he came up after the player that punched him i would call the punch a technical(i would not eject for fighting).
if the punched player came up swinging i would eject both for fighting.
i feel that if you blow your whistle on this play(do not be quick to signal) but watch the reaction and the out come of what happens before assessing penalties.

in the instance of this thread starter i would call a common foul on the player that inadvertantly punched the opponent. though i do see the point of view of the guys who would not penalize, i think you have to be there and have a feel for the type of game and your call should fit the game.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

If the ball is not yet at Team B's disposable for its throw-in, the ball is dead. And as I said in my earlier posting we then have to make the tough decisions for which are paid the big dollars to make.

Whether the ball is live or dead, I do not believe that you can compare this play with the inadvertent finger in the eye. A1's pumping of his fist was a deliberate (by that I mean he decided to pump his fist even though it may have been a sponatenous act) act. That does not mean it was a foul but as I stated in my first post, I get irritated when my two young sons do that kind of horse manure, and I know that they are just being young children emulating what they see on television (please do not construe that as an anti-television statement, thank goodness for ESPN and the Golf Channel).

Now back to the question of how to handle this situation. A1's made contact with B1 with his fist. This is a little different than if he had just turned to go up court and accidently knocked B1 down who was directly behind him and slower to react to Team A's successful field goal attempt.

Based upon the description in the original post, I would rule that the ball was at Team B's disposal for its throw-in, this makes the ball live, and the contact a personal foul (oh oh, the cat is out of the bag). I would then rule that A1's contact was a common foul (A1's contact with B1 was not intentional or flagrant) which put B1 at a disadvantage. I think that this is an approach that is not overkill but does address the contact in an even handed manner.

[eroe39]

This play actually happened two years ago in a WNBA game. It was ruled a flagrant foul 1, which is unecessary contact, player is not ejected. A technical foul would be a good option as well. The fist pumping with a player nearby is unecessary even if the player did not see her, it is her responsibility to see her. You can't ignore it because it was accidental. This could lead to something down the line if not called. I know if you hit Charles Oakley accidentally in the face then the next time down the court or even immediately he would accidentally hit you in the face. As others have stated you can't call a normal foul since the ball is dead due to the made basket. I would go with a technical in the high school game.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by eroe39
This play actually happened two years ago in a WNBA game. It was ruled a flagrant foul 1, which is unecessary contact, player is not ejected. A technical foul would be a good option as well. The fist pumping with a player nearby is unecessary even if the player did not see her, it is her responsibility to see her. You can't ignore it because it was accidental. This could lead to something down the line if not called. I know if you hit Charles Oakley accidentally in the face then the next time down the court or even immediately he would accidentally hit you in the face. As others have stated you can't call a normal foul since the ball is dead due to the made basket. I would go with a technical in the high school game.

Eli, you made some very good points. In my first posting I said that this is the type of contact that while may be inadvertent can lead to problems either immediately or later in the game.

[pizanno]

didn't expect such active interest and responses...

in hindsight, I would have like to whistle a common personal (live ball).

...another play in the ol' database to anticipate!

Thanks again for the feedback.

[Bart Tyson]

I think Crew has the best take. Another question, Can we can an intentional, as in a hard foul?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Bart Tyson
I think Crew has the best take. Another question, Can we can an intentional, as in a hard foul?

I do not know about a hard foul, but it is possible, if in your judgement that it was intentional, to charge it as an intentional foul. Technical, if the ball is dead; personal, if the ball is live.

[Bart Tyson]

Intentional foul does not have to be an intentional act. A few years back the powers to be ruled we can't read the minds of intent so if it is hard foul then we have an intentional foul. Which i do beleave most intentional fouls are because of hard fouls. We rule them an intentional foul because it is a hard foul.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Bart Tyson
Intentional foul does not have to be an intentional act. A few years back the powers to be ruled we can't read the minds of intent so if it is hard foul then we have an intentional foul. Which i do beleave most intentional fouls are because of hard fouls. We rule them an intentional foul because it is a hard foul.

I am not disagreeing with you regarding the addition of hard foul to the defintion of an intentional foul, I just do not know if a hard foul as opposed to a straight intentional foul is the correct way to go.

[Slider]

Originally posted by pizanno
didn't expect such active interest and responses...

in hindsight, I would have like to whistle a common personal (live ball).

...another play in the ol' database to anticipate!

Thanks again for the feedback.

Just remember, dead ball contact is a T (intentional or flagrant based on the severity).

Some of the posts muddled the issue, or s-t-r-e-t-c-h-e-d the rules (but not hideously :-)