Legal pick?

[Tio]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

So let me ask you this. What if we have a blocked shot where a much smaller player is shooting and a much bigger player is defending? And the result of the block puts the smaller player hard on the floor and possibly hurt. Now are we as officials supposed to now call a foul because the team on offense felt there was a foul?

Sounds like good defense to me. There is no illegal contact.

I can explain a no-call on this play much more easily than on the video play.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Tio

Sounds like good defense to me. There is no illegal contact.

I can explain a no-call on this play much more easily than on the video play.

Why can you explain that call to a coach and you cannot explain this contact? I had coaches think that legal screens like this were illegal. What is the difference? And remember, you brought into question what the coach thinks. I never said anything about making a call based on what a coach thinks.

Peace

[jearef]

I'm jumping in late on this one, but I've looked at the video several times, and I don't think this play is close. It's an illegal screen, not because the contact was severe, not because the game was tied or coach will be upset if I call it/don't call it. It's an illegal screen because it was an attempt to screen a moving defender, and the screener did not give the required time and distance (a minimum of one step) when the screen was set. Just my $.02.

[Tio]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Why can you explain that call to a coach and you cannot explain this contact? I had coaches think that legal screens like this were illegal. What is the difference? And remember, you brought into question what the coach thinks. I never said anything about making a call based on what a coach thinks.

Peace

I don't care what a coach thinks. Coaches are paranoid individuals.

I do care whether I can explain a call or a no call to a coach. I expect any official to be able to communicate why he did or did not call a foul or violation if the coach approaches us in a professional manner.

[mu4scott]

Originally Posted by Tio

I don't care what a coach thinks. Coaches are paranoid individuals.

I do care whether I can explain a call or a no call to a coach. I expect any official to be able to communicate why he did or did not call a foul or violation if the coach approaches us in a professional manner.

Amen!

Better get this engraved as well!

[mu4scott]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I have every right to bring up other plays when people use logic that is beyond what actually happen on this play. And if this screen was legal, then I wonder if you would not call a foul just because someone got hurt. Remember, I never suggested anything in this entire thread about if a player was hurt, but in response to the commentator (who is one of the worst) or comments from you and Tio about.



If you are worried about a game that gets out of hand on something that is not called, then you can compare any other no-call. If you do not like that comparison, then you should not be worried about what the crowd, coaches and players think. I have seen games get much more intense over plays that were actually called then plays that were not. I am trying to figure out what your standard is of making calls when you are so worried about what people think then whether the rules were actually violated. And the play in question was not so obvious without a shadow of a doubt. The only way I could clearly see this play was by the replay, not the live action.

Peace

Once again changing the scenario. Well I wonder if you would call "this, if this happened" and "if this coach did this" you would do this.

Jrut... I'm talking about this play and no other. I don't give a crap what a coach thinks, but at the level I'm at and the level I'm striving to be at I had better be able to explain what I called. If not to the coach then to the assignor or commisioner of the conference. I wouldn't want to explain a no call or intentional in this situation.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by msavakinas

Bob I disagree with some of these. I'm sure we have all passed on an illegal screen because it wasn't hard and it didn't really affect the game or hinder the defender, but it was illegal. There is stuff like that that happens all the time.

I think we all pass on illegal situations on occasion. That's where the principle of advantage/disadvantage came about...

-Josh

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by jdmara

I think we all pass on illegal situations on occasion. That's where the principle of advantage/disadvantage came about...

-Josh

Ok, I may be starting to tilt at windmills like other esteemed members, but my take on the above statement is we do not pass on illegal situations. We've simply judged them to be legal, perhaps due to advantage/disadvantage, since we did not make a call. If the contact/situation was truly illegal, then we missed the call, not passed on it.

[Tio]

Originally Posted by jdmara

I think we all pass on illegal situations on occasion. That's where the principle of advantage/disadvantage came about...

-Josh

We can't pass on fouls. We can pass on marginal contact.

If we pass on FOULS, we are picking and choosing which rules to enforce.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by Tio

We can't pass on fouls. We can pass on marginal contact.

If we pass on FOULS, we are picking and choosing which rules to enforce.

I'm not trying to split hair nor throw myself into a heated discussion (hence I've refrained from discussing the OP) but I don't think any of us can say we call absolutely everything by the book. For instance, do we call three seconds EVERY instance that someone is in the lane for three seconds? I would hope not. In fact I've been told more times than I can count (which admittedly isn't very high), that only a truly bad official would call it when it has no baring on the game. Just my 1-cent.

-Josh

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by msavakinas

here is an example of what i consider to be exemplary game management...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHZhDdcE2Iw&NR=1

Do you realize that many of us saw that movie before you were born?

It came out in 1988.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by msavakinas

Bob I disagree with some of these. I'm sure we have all passed on an illegal screen because it wasn't hard and it didn't really affect the game or hinder the defender, but it was illegal. There is stuff like that that happens all the time.

Not relevant. Look at the definition of "incidental contact."

If it didn't hinder the defender, it wasn't illegal and it shouldn't be called. It's not about passing on marginal contact. When there is contact, you need to decide three things.

1. Who is responsible. (A1, B1, or neither.)
2. Who is negatively affected by the play? (A1, B1, or neither.)

If the answer to either question is "neither," then it's not a foul regardless of the severity. If the answer to both questions is the same player/team, then it's not a foul. The only way it's a foul is if the player responsible is not on the same team as the player negatively affected by the contact.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Tio

I don't care what a coach thinks. Coaches are paranoid individuals.

I do care whether I can explain a call or a no call to a coach. I expect any official to be able to communicate why he did or did not call a foul or violation if the coach approaches us in a professional manner.

If you do not care, why are you concerned about what is the result of the play? If the play was illegal or legal, that is all you should ever be concerned with. How a player gets hurt is not your concern. Even as a football official, it is not my job to make sure players are protected from being hurt. The game is a violent game and people get hurt. Basketball is a game of contact and people get hurt. That happens whether people do something illegal or not. Remember this was your words about the player getting hurt, not mine. I have only focused on the legality of the play and wanted you to clarify why the player being hurt had any relevance. And you did refer to what the coach would say. I am not the one that put those words on the screen under your name.

Peace

[Adam]

Okay, just to clarify some things. I agree this particular play is (at least) a personal foul on A2. That's an easy call, IMO. I can't tell from the angle, however, if A2 raised her arms into B1. It sure looks like it's possible, and if she did that on a blind screen, the severity of the contact absolutely makes an intentional foul valid by rule. It's a judgment call.

Game management comes into play in determining whether this play should be intentional or not, IMO. The term "game management" is being used here, and I've mocked it to an extent but also said it's a real thing. I should explain. You absolutely cannot determine how GM should come into play with just this one play; you need to see the whole game, probably from the court with the referees' perspectives.

If A2 has been getting rough, or anyone for that matter, a righteous intentional foul might be a good thing to settle things down. If this is the first sign of trouble, a standard personal foul would probably suffice.

Again, remember, by rule, an intentional foul can be called if the contact is severe enough; even if it doesn't match the other requirements. Think of a shooter going up for a shot and getting clobbered and run over by B1 trying to block the shot. If we're going to protect an airborne shooter expecting to get challenged, why won't we protect a defender on an illegal blind screen?

To claim it's bad GM to call this intentional without seeing the rest of the game is just, well, um, well.... I disagree.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Tio

I don't care what a coach thinks. Coaches are paranoid individuals.

I do care whether I can explain a call or a no call to a coach. I expect any official to be able to communicate why he did or did not call a foul or violation if the coach approaches us in a professional manner.

If I make a call, I can explain it to a coach; period. I'm only concerned with whether I can explain it to an assigner or evaluator; not the coach. Coaches are easy to explain things to; just use single syllable words and speak slowly.

Someone that knows basketball isn't going to want to hear, "Because it was hard and someone could get hurt." Tell them to play chess. On this play, "she leaned into her" is sufficient to call the foul and all the other stuff is just going to get you into trouble with an evaluator; IMHO, of course.