I read in a previous post where there is no such thing as over the back. Could you please explain, because I sure see it called a lot. Thanx.

The foul is for a player ON the back of the opponent and the foul call is a push. There is nothing in the rule book that says over the back foul.

JWalker,
Merely reaching over an opponent from behind and attempting to get the ball is not a violation unless there is absolute contact between the players.
If such contact occurs it can be a "push" or "charge", but never an "over-the-back".
There is no such foul defined, and there is no such approved signal as the "Boogey Man" or "Big Ol' Bear" signal.
Thus, there is no "over-the-back" foul.
mick

Also, there can be contact created by the player from behind. But that doesn't mean it's a foul. If both players go up within their vertical plane, the contact is considered incidental. As has been stated above, if the player from behind displces the player in front, it's simply a push. Even if there is a slight push, most veteran officials will ignore it if the player in front is still able to rebound the ball. And, as mick stated, simply reaching above an opponent to rebound the ball is not a foul.

Illegal contact can also be created by the player in the front. Many times, he'll jump back into his opponent, who is going up within his vertical plane. Yet, fans and coaches will yell for a foul on the player from behind.

Bottom line, contact from behind doesn't mean there's a foul, and there's no such animal as "over the back."

Hope we've helped you! :)

Behind does not matter.
 

Contact behind or "on the back" is no different than any other part of the body. That is why "over the back" does not really exsist. There always must be contact that displaces or puts a player at some kind of disadvantage. You just cannot be behind someone and fouls should be called.

Peace

Yeah, you guys have helped me a lot. Thanks

Wow, you guys jumped all over this one. An easy one pops up and everybody wants a piece of it!! :)

Original post at 8:34 pm, then replies at 8:43, 8:45, and 8:55. I'm impressed with the efficiency of this board! :cool:

Chuck

Yeah, there is nothing like a new ref, to make everyone feel important. lol

Nah, just makes us feel useful! :)

Chuck

I worked in an adult league this weekend with a partner who kept calling over the back. I asked him about it, and he said that he only calls it when it's really a foul, ie there is a push. He says over the back because that's what everyone understands. As I watched, this was exactly what he did. He didn't call for reaching over, but only when there was a push involved. Well, I was in no position to argue, so I didn't, but in the future, I may just point out that continuing to call it that way confuses these adults who then come to their kids' games and scream, "Over the back!!" at the most inopportune moments.

My assistant coach is a source of ongoing advice to officials - travel, reach, 3 seconds, overtheback, comeonyougottacallthat in games, and I am always amazed when refs take it. I have tried to shut him up, but usually it takes a warning from the official or a simple question (who is the head coach here?) to close his mouth.
Anyhow, he always screams for over the back calls. This weekend when he yelled it out I was going to say that he should at least know that isn't the right call, ask for the push if you are going to ask for something. Before I can say anything, the ref who has blown the whistle yells for all to hear "Over the back!!" We skipped that lesson for the day :)

Good one, Coach ! :)

Coach, you are in charge of all your bench personnel. Why are you allowing your assistant coach to be "a source of ongoing advice to officials?"

Mark
I have one assistant coach. I absolutely need his basketball mind on the bench. He does a great job getting my players ready to go in, making adjustments with players who come out, keeping the bench into the game. He picks up things I don't see during the game, and helps me with my substitution pattern. Can't do without him. Buuutttt. . .

There is this ongoing running commentary that I can't stand, and have let him know this. But I got a game to coach, and can't spend every minute focussing on what he says, and coaching a coach rather than my players. I have toned him down (he used to get us Td once a month) to the annoying running commentary from the belligerent shout. He is actually acting in a controlled manner if you know how he used to be. I have also had to teach him how to appropriately address players, because that was a problem.

If I feel he is really pushing it or crosses any lines, I let him know. But you gotta choose your battles - and, by the way, the refs are able to ignore it as much as me - it is kind of like a soothing background noise after a while. And we periodically discuss bench behavior, but he has a hard time controlling it. I could say I don't have a replacement for him, but I don't really think I want a replacement. On the positive side, incidentally, he is the first to give our players the business if they don't help an opponent up after fouling them - he is a real advocate of sportsmanship, just has a hard time with one aspect of it.

And if he gets Td, he shuts up and I take that as part of the bargain that I cut - may not be the best deal, but you take what you can get when you ask someone to give up 10 months of their year as a volunteer coach, going to games almost every weekend for that whole time. And none of us are perfect, he just has different weaknesses than I do. We both have the same values and love the game and teaching it to our players.

[Edited by Hawks Coach on Apr 30th, 2002 at 12:44 PM]

Juulie - if this was P+R basketball, please tell them. I've dealt with this call from those guys every weekend so far this spring (since I am working with them on youth games), plus the dreaded "reach". Maybe if enough of us harp on it, they might stop.

Suuuuuuuure.

BTW - many of them are PBOA officials. I'm sure Howard isn't teaching this.

: plus the dreaded "reach".

Mark, what about the dreaded 'reach'? Dont tell me THATS not a call either! Man, Ive got a lot to learn!

You are correct. Reaching is not a foul. Contacting an opponent illegally with the hand is a foul. It's called illegal use of hands. Fans, players, and coaches will scream "He's reachin'!!" when a player swats at the ball to make a steal. That's not a foul. It's only a foul if his hand or arm makes illegal contact with the opponent.

Answer this:

The ball is loose on the floor. B1 dives for the ball, gains controls, and slides about ten feet. What's your call?

Safe? ...Out?

So, when the official blows his whistle and calls 'Reaching', that isnt actually a call? The call would be 'on the arm', etc?

Generally "a reach-in foul" is a push, in my book.

Interesting, Dan.
I'm usually thinking "illegal hands".

An official shouldn't say, "Reaching," just as an official shouldn't say "Over the back!" The terms do not exist in the basketball rule book.

It's not necessary to say anything. Simply give the signal that corresponds to the foul.

Call the foul:

Whistle and raise fist to recognize foul.
Bird dog if you want to, I don't.
Tell your partner who the foul is on, who the shooter is, if there is a shooter or where the spot is for the throw-in.

Report to the table:
"Blue, 4-4!"
Give signal. No verbalization is necessary.
Indicate number of shots if necessary.

That's all.

Either works but I prefer push since generally the actual
contact is a hand or arm pushing against the dribblers arm. And, I like "illegal use o' the hands" mostly for shooting
fouls. It's just me, don't ask why, it just is...maybe
too many doobs back when I was younger...err..., young? ;)

Was that on 4, or 44? ;)

You are giving me excuses for why you are not doing your job. An assistant coach is to be seen by and not heard by officials. Now having said that, I have no problem with assistant coaches asking me where the designated spot is for throw-ins and other such information as long as is it is done in a curtious manner.

The fact that he has a great basketball mind and gives his time for free for ten months a year is not a reason for not doing your job. If he cannot control his bench behavior then you have to control it for him. That means that maybe you need to ban him from the bench until he understands what is acceptable and unacceptable behavior for bench personnel. If he is a real advocate for sportsmanship then he has to lead by example, because your players see how he acts on the bench and they see how you accept his bench behavior. An assistant coach who gets a technical foul has real bench behavior problems and the head coach as leadership problems.

I'm a "Blue, 44" kinda guy myself.

Me, too. But I try to keep it simple for the youngsters! ;)

Thank you.

Risk vs Reward
 

Mark,

I have a player who fouls too much. Should I ban her from the team until she gets better with that? Of course not. I'll take 16 ppg and 12 rpg in return for 4 or 5 fouls every game. Should the assistant coach act properly? Of course. But if the coach determined that his usefulness outweighs the damage he does, he has done his job.

It's not a black or white world. Even the black and white rule book leaves room for interpretation (start a Three Seconds in the Lane thread if you don't believe me). We have to make decisions in the gray all the time, and the coach has done this.

Well thanks, I really appreciate that! ;)

Re: Risk vs Reward
 

Gotta agree with that!Whether we like it or not,it is part of our job to keep the benches under control.If the head coach doesn't control his bench,then the head coach may end up being seat-belted-or even leaving on 3 indirect T's.I can't make that choice for the coach.That's his choice,and I don't let his choice bother me-either way.Que sera,sera!

When an official blows his whistle and calls 'Reaching', it means that official wasn't trained properly.

BTW - I notice you said "his" whistle. Are you implying female officials do not make errors? Even correctable ones? ;)

1) I do not have a job, I am a volunteer. You are paid to do this, you have a job. I spend hundreds of hours a year on kids with no familial relationship to me receiving no remuneration of any kind, while a couple of teenagers that do have a familial relationship are at home with my spouse or going to the movies. Don't take this high road approach with me, Saint Mark.

2) My primary mission in my volunteer effort is to give 15 outstanding players an opportunity to play high level ball and to prepare them for HS and hopefully college. I believe I am on the right track and teaching the right values. My player's parents agree, and most refs have a lot of respect for me, how I conduct myself, and how I control my team.

3) In games, I need an assistant who has the same goals and focus that I have, a good knowledge of the game, and I don't have much to choose from in this regard, espcially in the less highly regarded world of girls ball. If you can't understand that, then you obviously haven't tried running a high level basketball program with high quality volunteer coaches for a sustained period of time.

4) I have a choice - work with a person who is putting forth an honest effort and try to change his habits over time, which I have done quite successfully thus far. Alternatively, I can ban him as you suggest and take the chance that a hardworking, honest individual will be lost as a coach for these girls. I believe that I am refining his bench demeanor just as I am refining the players composure on the floor. Just as I don't bench my point guard for making a mistake, but put her back out to learn, I don't banish my assistant.

I am glad it is so easy to inform me what choices I should make, especially when you know nothing of our individual circumstances or character. Unfortunately, many choices are not as black and white as you would cast them to be. My approach is different than yours - you choose as you must, but please allow me the same freedom. It isn't that I have not done anything to handle this situation, it's just that I haven't done what you would have done.

And whack my assistant if you ref one of our games and think he deserves it - I honestly don't mind. I think it helps to educate him even more than I can! And if he doesn't do anything worth one T in at least the last 60 games we have played (this is a fact), how is it I should ban him? He's gotten maybe 5 warnings in that time. He's received far more correction from me than from your striped shirted brethren, who are doing a JOB. Evidently, it is a bigger issue with me than with them.

Re: Re: Risk vs Reward
 

Thanks for the support, folks. While I was getting a little wordy, you said it all quite well.

Hawks Coach - it was wordy, but it was good!!! Keep 'em coming!!

Trust me, I am female, and I make more mistakes than anyone.

I just said "his" whistle, the same way we say "mankind". I am not a 'womens lib-est' so I never think about saying stuff like "goddess" for 'god', or 'herstory' for 'history'.

Thank goodness. For a moment I thought you were going to say you blow your "whertle".

Hey Hawks Coach, I would be happy to work one of your
7th grade girl's games for you. It's people like you that
make me proud to be involved in the sport.

Yeah, Hawks Coach probably has refs lining up.
Good mind set, Coach.