What do you have???

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

What if both close plays occur on the same end of the court? Should the officials call both plays the same so that both close decisions go against the same team?

What a great point! I forgot about that rule requiring an equal number of fouls to be called on each team. Thanks for reminding me.

[JRutledge]

I do not think it is clear there was actually any contact with the defender by the shooter. It looks very possible that the shooter was preparing for contact and just fell. After all there was no call by the official and we cannot see if there was much contact if any. I did not clearly see the shooter bounce off the defender. I saw a shooter just fall to the floor.

Peace

[mu4scott]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not think it is clear there was actually any contact with the defender by the shooter. It looks very possible that the shooter was preparing for contact and just fell. After all there was no call by the official and we cannot see if there was much contact if any. I did not clearly see the shooter bounce off the defender. I saw a shooter just fall to the floor.

Peace

Looks pretty obvious to me there is contact. I realize the camera angle makes things a little subjective, but the offensive player's body is clearly altered after he releases the ball.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by mu4scott

Looks pretty obvious to me there is contact. I realize the camera angle makes things a little subjective, but the offensive player's body is clearly altered after he realeases the ball.

It does not look obvious to me because he fell like a bag of bricks. And considering I have seen that play for real, and the defender never moved (his feet were basically in the same place, which is a clear sign he flopped), there might have been some contact, but not contact that caused the shooter to fall.

Peace

[mu4scott]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It does not look obvious to me because he fell like a bag of bricks. And considering I have seen that play for real, and the defender never moved (his feet were basically in the same place, which is a clear sign he flopped), there might have been some contact, but not contact that caused the shooter to fall.

Peace

When a player is going hard to the basket like this it doesn't take much of a bump to get them off balance. I'm not adament that it should be a block or a charge, but I do think it needs to be one or the other.

After pausing the play and looking at the lead officials position when the "crash" occured he has the same angle as we do (his lack of hustle duelly noted).

At each camp I went to this summer it was drilled in our heads that if you have players on the floor in a situation like this (block/charge calls especially) you better have a whistle.

[Nevadaref]

I have reorganized some statements from your post so as to respond to its content in the most effective way.

Originally Posted by mu4scott

When a player is going hard to the basket like this it doesn't take much of a bump to get them off balance.

So what if he is off balance due to some contact? WHO CAUSED THAT CONTACT? If you are going to penalize the defender on a play such as this, then you must articulate exactly what the defender did that was illegal.
If he merely stood there and the offensive player bumped into him and was thrown off balance, then you should not be penalizing the defender.
You have yet to state what you believe the defender did that was illegal.

Originally Posted by mu4scott

At each camp I went to this summer it was drilled in our heads that if you have players on the floor in a situation like this (block/charge calls especially) you better have a whistle. I'm not adament that it should be a block or a charge, but I do think it needs to be one or the other.

That has been the philosophy of the NCAAW game for a few years now, but it has not been and currently is not the concept used in NCAAM games or NFHS games. Sometimes severe contact occurs that is just incidental and does not require a whistle even if there are multiple bodies on the floor. Despite what you are hearing at camp, that is acceptable under the right circumstances in the NCAAM and NFHS games.

Originally Posted by mu4scott

After pausing the play and looking at the lead officials position when the "crash" occured he has the same angle as we do (his lack of hustle duelly noted).

Great job of recognizing the troublesome position of the official at the time of the critical play, and some really cool work in freezing and positng the video frame!
This is what is called getting straight-lined. The official is lined up with the two players such that he cannot see between them. Thus he has no angle to see or judge any contact that may occur. This official has a very poor position from which to try to make a decision on this play. Learn from his mistake and work hard for proper angles on possible contact situations.

[mu4scott]

That is my bad for not being clear on my thoughts. I think the defender was late in getting there and his contact caused the offensive player to lose his balance and fall awkward. If I was standing on the baseline and the defender merely flopped and the offensive player was never touched and simply lost his balance then I have nothing. IMHO I think there was contact so I have to have a whistle.

As far as the “players on the floor philosophy” goes I’m only repeating what I heard and was told by a handful of DI men’s clinicians as well as an assigner. Bodies on the floor then you better have a whistle.

I have mad photoshop skills.

[mu4scott]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It does not look obvious to me because he fell like a bag of bricks. And considering I have seen that play for real, and the defender never moved (his feet were basically in the same place, which is a clear sign he flopped), there might have been some contact, but not contact that caused the shooter to fall.

Peace

Looks like substantial contact was made.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by mu4scott

Looks like substantial contact was made.

Firewalls here prevent his picture from coming through. That said, I saw the video this morning, and video generally provides a better view of contact than a still shot.

There are examples of when "substantial contact" can and should be ruled incidental.

A1 (point guard) drives into the paint towards B5. A1 attempt to pull up short, but ends up hitting B5. Contact is sufficient to stop A1 cold in his tracks and he falls to the floor. B5 doesn't so much as flinch from the contact. It's a no-call on the contact, and a possible travel.

In the video, I can't have a block because it looks to me like the defense is in position. I can't have a PC because the defender was falling backwards by his own power; the offense didn't cause it. Everytime I've no-called a flop (well, most times) at this level (this looks like varsity), the coach yelled at his player for bailing out on the play.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by mu4scott

Looks like substantial contact was made.

Which player do you believe is responsible for that contact?
The defender who is crumpling backward and away or the offensive player who is jumping towards and into the defender?

At this point in the video (your still frame capture) the question of whether the defender arrived at his spot in time or late has to have already been answered. If you could say for sure that defender was late in obtaining his position, then this photo could justify a block call, but without that critical bit of information it seems more proper to penalize the offensive player from what is depicted in this frame.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by mu4scott

Looks like substantial contact was made.

I see a blurry picture where I cannot see for sure contact or not contact. And really that was the point. You cannot tell much by the picture and if this was my look as an official, then I would be at best guessing.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I see a blurry picture where I cannot see for sure contact or not contact. And really that was the point. You cannot tell much by the picture and if this was my look as an official, then I would be at best guessing.

Peace

Agreed. This picture is worthless in determining wether there was contact and how much. From the video, you can see the defender flop. This picture doesn't discredit that thought at all.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not think it is clear there was actually any contact with the defender by the shooter. It looks very possible that the shooter was preparing for contact and just fell.

I just don't see how there could not be contact. Shooter when up vertical and came down horizontal. People just don't start rotating in mid-air without some external impetus...and doubt there was that much wind in the place.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

After all there was no call by the official and we cannot see if there was much contact if any.

Can put much stock in that...we've established that he was way out of position and was running full speed at the same time trying to make up for being flatfooted at the other end of the court.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I did not clearly see the shooter bounce off the defender. I saw a shooter just fall to the floor.

Peace