Part II: Defender drops on hands and knees...

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by PSidbury

Part I post seemed to get a little far afield from the intial intent.

Forget about displacement or offensive foul calling or non-calling and please allow the intent and focus of this post be about the legality of the B-player dropping to his hands and knees.

The ball goes in to the A-forward on the block and he begins to dribble backwards toward the goal.
However… the B-defender who is between A-player and goal immediately drops to his hands and knees (within his space) and… you guessed it… the A-player backs-up and tumbles over B-player.

1) What is the NFHS ruling on this and what would you guys call and on whom?

2) The assumption is that the B-player has "intentionally" fallen to his hands and knees in order to "stop" the A-player, however what if the B-player falls to his hands and knees as a result of feigning injury of some kind? How would we know the difference?

Thanks,
Paul

Are you kidding?

[Nevadaref]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the physical position of the defender on his hands and knees. That is not what any official should penalize.
The problem here is the tactic of purposely adopting that position with the intent to put his opponent in a dangerous situation. Simply put the idea of the defender is to do something unfair and unsafe. That cannot be allowed and must be penalized.

I would not penalize based upon the physical contact which may or may not take place in this specific case. I would penalize based upon the mental process undertaken by the defender. His conciously chose to do something not within the spirit of fair play. That meets the definition of an unsporting foul. Thus the penalty that I select is an unsporting technical foul and it occurs as soon as the defender adopts this position, but I may withhold the whistle to allow the opponent to finish his scoring play and then enforce the penalty. So again any physical contact is not the central issue.

I know that the criticism of this method of handling the situation is going to be that an official cannot read the mind of a player or that one doesn't know if the defender is injured. In answer to that I say that it can quickly be determined whether the player is hurt or not, and while an official can never know exactly what a player or coach is thinking reasonable determinations of such can be made from their actions. Afterall, that is why we get paid the big bucks!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by PSidbury

So, I started a new thread to focus on what really was my question, (taking the backing-down out of the equation), and less on all this peanut gallery "Why did you allow the milk to be spilled?" rhetoric.

Sheesh.

"Peanut gallery"? "Sheesh"?

From some rookie clown who obviously hasn't figured out which end of the whistle to blow yet?

You didn't learn a damn thing, did ya? You also still haven't learned what was really important about the whole situation that you originally posted either, have ya?

Hint.....it ain't some once-in million, might-never-happen situation. It's about a new official that very obviously doesn't know some very basic rules relating to illegal contact.

Lah me....peanut gallery.....

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

"Peanut gallery"? "Sheesh"?

From some rookie clown who obviously hasn't figured out which end of the whistle to blow yet?

You didn't learn a damn thing, did ya? You also still haven't learned what was really important about the whole situation that you originally posted either, have ya?

Hint.....it ain't some once-in million, might-never-happen situation. It's about a new official that very obviously doesn't know some very basic rules relating to illegal contact.

Lah me....peanut gallery.....

JR is right, but his words are rather harsh, so let me put it another way.

Here's what you need to do:

1. Admit that you F'd up the situation. -- No big deal. We all have at one time or another. That's how experience is gained.

2. Learn from it. -- Study the rules regarding displacement and do a better job in the future of calling PC fouls for that so that the situation does not degenerate into a mess.-- This is the key step.

You will be an improved official if you take something positive from this bad experience.

Good luck.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

1. Admit that you F'd up the situation. -- No big deal. We all have at one time or another.

Speak for yourself, grasshopper.

[jsblanton]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Somehow, I don't think being on your hands and knees qualifies as being in "legal guarding position". What do you guys think?

exactly what I was thinking!

[Nevadaref]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett
Somehow, I don't think being on your hands and knees qualifies as being in "legal guarding position". What do you guys think?

Originally Posted by jsblanton

exactly what I was thinking!

LGP has nothing to do with this play. A player is entitled to any spot on the floor per 4-23-1.

If that doesn't do it for you, the defender could establish INITIAL LGP and then does not have to keep both feet on the floor or continue facing the opponent in order to maintain it per 4-23-3. Turning away or ducking is specifically allowed.

[PSidbury]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

"Peanut gallery"? "Sheesh"?

From some rookie clown who obviously hasn't figured out which end of the whistle to blow yet?

You didn't learn a damn thing, did ya? You also still haven't learned what was really important about the whole situation that you originally posted either, have ya?

Hint.....it ain't some once-in million, might-never-happen situation. It's about a new official that very obviously doesn't know some very basic rules relating to illegal contact.

Lah me....peanut gallery.....

This is not being playful or a lesson in thick skin or anything else but an insult.

Why?

[RookieDude]

Originally Posted by PSidbury

This is not being playful or a lesson in thick skin or anything else but an insult.

Why?

Take a deep breath PSidbury...

You put some VERY experienced and intelligent officials in a "peanut gallery"...

calm down and LISTEN to these veterans.

If you want to trade barbs...trust me...you are messing with the best here.

LISTEN to these veterans...IMO, you will become a better official.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by PSidbury

This is not being playful or a lesson in thick skin or anything else but an insult.

Why?

Whatinthehell do you expect from the peanut gallery? And if it's coming from the peanut gallery, why should you give a damn anyway?

Consider the source and just ignore. It's all just meaningless rhetoric anyway, as you previously said.

[bob jenkins]

My opinion: The "entitled to any spot on the floor" and the related "dives for the ball and A trips over the prone player" rules / cases are for instances where basketball plays are being made.

Dropping to the hands and knees in the situation described is not a baketball play.

I'd penalize as Camron suggests in post #14.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the physical position of the defender on his hands and knees. That is not what any official should penalize.
The problem here is the tactic of purposely adopting that position with the intent to put his opponent in a dangerous situation. Simply put the idea of the defender is to do something unfair and unsafe. That cannot be allowed and must be penalized.

I would not penalize based upon the physical contact which may or may not take place in this specific case. I would penalize based upon the mental process undertaken by the defender. His conciously chose to do something not within the spirit of fair play. That meets the definition of an unsporting foul. Thus the penalty that I select is an unsporting technical foul and it occurs as soon as the defender adopts this position, but I may withhold the whistle to allow the opponent to finish his scoring play and then enforce the penalty. So again any physical contact is not the central issue.

I know that the criticism of this method of handling the situation is going to be that an official cannot read the mind of a player or that one doesn't know if the defender is injured. In answer to that I say that it can quickly be determined whether the player is hurt or not, and while an official can never know exactly what a player or coach is thinking reasonable determinations of such can be made from their actions. Afterall, that is why we get paid the big bucks!

Well, I agree with Bob.

I think I can live with the unsporting T, as it is not too much different than the "barking dog" play. And, if that's the case, I wouldn't need to wait to see if anyone gets injured, or if there's any contact at all.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by PSidbury

However, my intent in these posts was always about focusing on the legality of the defender dropping to his hands and knees.

So, I started a new thread to focus on what really was my question, (taking the backing-down out of the equation), and less on all this peanut gallery "Why did you allow the milk to be spilled?" rhetoric.

Sheesh.

Thanks,
Paul

Your question on the legality of what the defender did was answered within the first couple of replies on BOTH threads. As far as the peanut gallery, spilled milk rhetoric - good grief. You screwed up by not calling the PC foul, and you screwed up by telling the coach what you did...that was pointed out to you and you didn't like it. So be it...we now know who can't handle constructive criticism.

[Tio]

Originally Posted by PSidbury

Part I post seemed to get a little far afield from the intial intent.

Forget about displacement or offensive foul calling or non-calling and please allow the intent and focus of this post be about the legality of the B-player dropping to his hands and knees.

The ball goes in to the A-forward on the block and he begins to dribble backwards toward the goal.
However… the B-defender who is between A-player and goal immediately drops to his hands and knees (within his space) and… you guessed it… the A-player backs-up and tumbles over B-player.

1) What is the NFHS ruling on this and what would you guys call and on whom?

2) The assumption is that the B-player has "intentionally" fallen to his hands and knees in order to "stop" the A-player, however what if the B-player falls to his hands and knees as a result of feigning injury of some kind? How would we know the difference?

Thanks,
Paul

Paul, I hope you understand that the many officials who replied to your initial post are trying to show you that this situation occurred because of your crew's failure to properly adjudicate the rules.

Defenders who "flop" are surrendering their legal guarding position. Any contact with a defender in an illegal guarding position is a block. If you can determine the defender intentionally undercut the offensive player than you may consider an intentional foul.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Tio

Defenders who "flop" are surrendering their legal guarding position. Any contact with a defender in an illegal guarding position is a block.

While I agree this is a defensive foul. I disagree with these two sentences. Players who fall backwards are not surrendering their LGP.
Players without LGP are not always responsible for contact.