I had this situation that I still don't know what I should have done:

High school playoff game. Not a tight game, but not a blowout. No problems or trash talking thus far.

2nd half, Team A starts to make a run. A1 dunks in traffic to cut the lead to 2. Excitedly, and completely without malice, A1 turns and (without seeing B1 there) punches the air with emotion, catching B1 in the back of the head (he was also turning down court to continue play).

B1 goes down. A1 embarrassingly tries to help B1, but he stays down. Fortunately, B1 not injured...more shocked. He gets up and stays in the game (after sub).

Should I have called a foul? I did not. Coach wanted a foul, I think more because A1 had four fouls and Team A was making a run. He didn't like my "incidental contact" explaination, but agreed that it was an accident.

What would you have done? Is there a rule citation that covers this weird situation?

Tough situation. You have a kid who gets punched in the back of the head and goes down, stays down. We've all seen kids do the fist pumping thing.

I honestly don't know what I'd do in that situation without seeing it for myself. It's hard to call a punch to the head incidental. It was clearly not intentional, but was it so hard that it could not be ignored? Seems that way from your description.

Without seeing it, and just going by your description, I think I have a dead ball contact foul. I don't see how you can have a kid go to the floor after getting punched and let it go. Again, just my opinion, and I didn't see it. But that's my gut reaction.

Chuck

That would really be a tough call. I tend to agree with Chuck. How can you have that kind of contact without a call.

Does the defense ever foul on purpose during normal play of a game? I call a pushing foul even if B1 accidently trips A1. I know all my fouls are accidental unless I'm just trying to stop the clock in the final seconds.

Sorry, I don't have a reference.

I Vote for a Regular Personal Foul
 

Don't think it would be a dead ball foul (as Chuck says above), because it's not a dead ball situation. But I would think you'd have to call something. Probably not an intentional foul or a flagrant foul, but maybe an ordinary personal foul. There was hard contact and a player went down, so (based on your description) I think I would have called an ordinary foul. But I wasn't there, so...

Aren't most fouls unintentional---if a player accidentally hits a shooter arm, do you ignore it?? Why would you ignore this one.

beep, foul

Re: I Vote for a Regular Personal Foul
 

The contact came after a made basket. The ball becomes dead until it is at the disposal of the thrower-in. I assumed that the contact occurred immediately after the basket, before the offense had taken it out again. This would be a dead ball technical foul.

Chuck

Not that it changes anything, but I probably overstated the contact, and reaction.

I would characterize the "punch" as glancing, and B1 stayed down more out of drama (in hindsight) than injury. Got up and without much incident or apparent affect.

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

I'm thinking not all contact is a foul, intentional or othewise.

Re: Re: I Vote for a Regular Personal Foul
 

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".

Here's my two cents. It sounds like this happened during a dead ball to me. You ignore contact during a dead ball unless it is intentional or flagrant. Certainly, this wasn't intentional, but was it flagrant?

I'm not saying it was, but here's some points to consider.

1) I'm not sure you can have a flagrant foul without there being the intent to foul, which wasn't there in this case

2) Seemingly contrary to statement 1 - you can define a flagrant act (and therefore a flagrant foul) as one that intends to injure another player (not the case here) or as an act that displays disregard for the safety of another player. You could make a case that anytime someone pumps their fist in the air, there is a chance they may make hard contact and therefore the act of pumping it displays disregard for the safety of others.

As I said, I'm not sure I agree that this should have been a foul call, but a foul call here (flagrant technical) may be defensible.

Most of the time i don't see to poke in the eye. I see the reaction of the player getting hit in the eye. And therefore i know he got poked in the eye. So, in this case, no foul. However, if i see the poke in the eye than yes i have a foul. So, when i see the punch as you described i will call a common foul. The player earned his foul for being stupid. Please don't take the "stupid" literal.

I do not want to take the emotion out of the game, but it was Jim Brown who was quoted about dancing around after making a touchdown: "Act like you have been there before."

Having said that, I think that while A1 may have been acting without malice, but I do a slow burn when I see either one of my two sons (ages: 9 and 12) do that kind of nonsense during one of their games, because while they are pumping their fist or chesting their teammate, the opponents are ripping down court with the ball on a fast break.

So, what is my take. I think that you have a dead ball contact technical foul on A1. While his pumping his fist was a show of emotion to pump up his teammates, it can also be construed by his opponents as taunting. The logical question to be asked is if you do nothing and B1 or one of his teammates had decided to give A1 a knuckle sandwich, what are you going to do about A1's original act.

It is a tough call, but that is why we are being paid the big dollars to make these tough decisions.

Mark, I can live with a T. You do have great point in if the other kid would have came up swinging, after you call a common foul or a no call. Hmmmm this would be hard to explain to the coach and supervisor.

At least a personal here. We always will have the accidental hand to face or body...the finger in the eye...the player who can't get his brakes to work and bumps a player which causes the travel or pushes him out of bounds....wouldn't you call a foul on those? I think I could also live with the T if the player went down and/or it was hard contact.

IMO, you had the right call. I think you would have recognized a flagrant/intentional act immediately. Trust yourself.

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.

Re: Re: Re: I Vote for a Regular Personal Foul
 

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.

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

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

this is a good topic
 

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.

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.

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.

Thanks!
 

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.

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.

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.

Re: Thanks!
 

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 :-)