Celtics offensive foul call

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

I'm with Dan. Sure, he stepped into the defender's path. But not very much. I like a no call on this a LOT better than the offensive foul.

Ref no calls it and all hell will break lose....way to much contact involving a shooter to not have something. If he calls nothing, the coaches, the fans, and the press will be raking him over the coals for not putting the shooter on the line (that would be the angle they would take).

His motion had absolutely nothing to do with taking the shot. It wasn't a basketball play. The defender had established a non-contact path and was in the air. Pierce gave up an open shot solely to create contact...his foul.

Reverse the roles....a defender moving the exact same way into the path of an airborne shooter...any question about that one?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Well he certainly was not trying to shoot at the time of contact.

Peace

I agree. If there was a foul, I have 2 shots not three. Barry moved in such a way that the contact was minimized rather than "taking one for the team" in order to "sell the call" as suggested by Reggie Miller and others. But this should not let the defender off the hook if the contact hindered the shot, which I think it did.

New question: If the Pierce/Hamilton play is a game deciding last second play, would/should Salvatore have made the same call?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I agree. If there was a foul, I have 2 shots not three. Barry moved in such a way that the contact was minimized rather than "taking one for the team" in order to "sell the call" as suggested by Reggie Miller and others. But this should not let the defender off the hook if the contact hindered the shot, which I think it did.

And that is why some of us are working the NBA and some of us never will get there. Officials at that level are judged on those kinds of plays while officials not working those levels can call whatever and most will never care.

Originally Posted by just another ref

New question: If the Pierce/Hamilton play is a game deciding last second play, would/should Salvatore have made the same call?

Why not? If it is obvious what Pierce did, the time of the game should not matter in my opinion.

Peace

[JLMatthew]

"New question: If the Pierce/Hamilton play is a game deciding last second play, would/should Salvatore have made the same call?"



Absolutely...and Salvatore would have the stones to do it too.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And that is why some of us are working the NBA and some of us never will get there. Officials at that level are judged on those kinds of plays......

Originally Posted by NBA spokesman Tim Frank

"With the benefit of instant replay, it appears a foul should have been called."

So now that Joey has been judged, what happens to him?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

So now that Joey has been judged, what happens to him?

I have no idea. Maybe he does not get a certain game in the Finals. Maybe he was fined for the missed call (Which I disagree with the way the NBA handled that). I guess only someone that is in the NBA or works in the NBA knows. I did hear on time an NBA Official say that working that level is not as fun as you think.

Peace

[zebraman]

Originally Posted by canuckrefguy

Watch the video again - the replay in particular that shows the angle from behind.

Seriously - you don't see Pierce lunge out sideways?

Really?

Lean sideways? Yes.
Lunge? Nope, don't see anything close to a lunge.

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Ref no calls it and all hell will break lose....way to much contact involving a shooter to not have something. If he calls nothing, the coaches, the fans, and the press will be raking him over the coals for not putting the shooter on the line (that would be the angle they would take).

His motion had absolutely nothing to do with taking the shot. It wasn't a basketball play. The defender had established a non-contact path and was in the air. Pierce gave up an open shot solely to create contact...his foul.

Reverse the roles....a defender moving the exact same way into the path of an airborne shooter...any question about that one?

Good post Camron.

To help those out who claim to have no idea what is and is not a foul in the pro game, I am going to state some plays so when you see them you will know why they are called and if they are not then just chuck them up as missed plays:

There are 4 pertinent plays in which the nba wants offensive fouls called and they want them called as such due to the actions being overt in nature.

The first is a "wipe out" or "clear out" in which the offensive player goes in for a dunk or a layup and in doing so fends off the defender with his off arm in attempt to keep him from blocking the shot, contesting it, etc. He may also not lead with an unnatural knee or leg kick. This move is considered overt and will be deemed an offensive foul regardless of restricted area guidelines.

The second is leg kicks or unnatural extension of the leg by jump shooters in order to attempt to "fool the referee". Leg kicks of this nature will be deemed overt and an offensive foul will be called.

The third has also to do with jump shooters in which if the official judges that the defender will miss or not contact the shooter and the jump shooter makes an overt move to draw contact, this will also be deemed an offensive foul.

Lastly, is when a dribbler is coming up the floor and notices a trailing defender coming up behind him and "seeks him out" to draw contact. This will also be deemed an offensive foul.

There is just a snippet of what should be getting called. Like I said if it is not then chuck it up as a miss. We all miss plays. It's human nature.

[mick]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

There are 4 pertinent plays in which the nba wants offensive fouls called and they want them called as such due to the actions being overt in nature.

btaylor64,
In order to better understand your post, could you briefly state your source of information?
Thanks.
mick

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by mick

btaylor64,
In order to better understand your post, could you briefly state your source of information?
Thanks.
mick

Mick, his claims of having "NBA" sources are credible. I do know for a fact that he is subject to NBA training.

[mick]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Mick, his claims of having "NBA" sources are credible. I do know for a fact that he is subject to NBA training.

Very cool !

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Mick, his claims of having "NBA" sources are credible. I do know for a fact that he is subject to NBA training.

Legitimate question.....not a flame.....

What possible good could NBA training be if you aren't working at that level? If you are working high school/college ball, isn't that what what you should be concentrating on?

I say that knowing from Ben's past posts that he is a fairly new/young official that seems to be struggling mightily with both the NFHS and NCAA rulesets. If you're working high school ball and you don't have a very good grasp of those rules, why waste time on a ruleset that you don't work?

[Cajun Reff]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Legitimate question.....not a flame.....

What possible good could NBA training be if you aren't working at that level? If you are working high school/college ball, isn't that what what you should be concentrating on?

I say that knowing from Ben's past posts that he is a fairly new/young official that seems to be struggling mightily with both the NFHS and NCAA rulesets. If you're working high school ball and you don't have a very good grasp of those rules, why waste time on a ruleset that you don't work?

as soon as I read his post, this is the first thing that came to my mind

and Salvatore's call seemed very unnecessary to me, Pierce did initiate contact and then he threw up a wild shot so if you dont blow the whistle on the contact then the Celtics had already been penalized by losing possession on the terrible shot

but he clearly travelled to initiate the contact and IMHO the travelling call should have been made

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Legitimate question.....not a flame.....

What possible good could NBA training be if you aren't working at that level? If you are working high school/college ball, isn't that what what you should be concentrating on?

There are people in this area that work Pro-Am ball with NBA Rules with current college and professional players. The officials use NBA/Pro-Am rules and mechanics and several NBA Officials help train and evaluate the officials. Some get the opportunity to work in other Pro leagues that could lead to NBDL or the WNBA. I cannot speak for what goes on in other parts of the country, but that is an option for people around here.

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I say that knowing from Ben's past posts that he is a fairly new/young official that seems to be struggling mightily with both the NFHS and NCAA rulesets. If you're working high school ball and you don't have a very good grasp of those rules, why waste time on a ruleset that you don't work?

Learning pro rules does not mean you have to know other rules sets first.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Legitimate question.....not a flame.....

What possible good could NBA training be if you aren't working at that level? If you are working high school/college ball, isn't that what what you should be concentrating on?

I say that knowing from Ben's past posts that he is a fairly new/young official that seems to be struggling mightily with both the NFHS and NCAA rulesets. If you're working high school ball and you don't have a very good grasp of those rules, why waste time on a ruleset that you don't work?

I can't speak to Ben's situation but I have seen and know NCAA officials who don't have a good grasp on NFHS rules.

If Ben is having trouble with NBA rules I'm sure he would receive a letter indicating such.