What happened first?
 

I would like some varisty level opinions only please.
JV Girls game. Level of play, very average. Point gaurd drives the lane, I am the lead and step down to get a good look. Defensive Center see's her break free and takes 2 steps jumps and smacks the ball away but her momentum carrys her into the airborn point gaurd knocking her sideways. She puts her hand down which stops her from going to the ground.

Under "protect the airborn shooter", I hit my whistle and we are shooting two. Home coach and home crowd hates the call. At the half the varsity official who was observing asks what I saw? I explaned. He said what happened first, the block or the contact? I said "the block". "The way I see that play is the bock was first, then the contact was incidental."

In a boys JV game, I tend to agree. Boys can take that contact. Having been a long time girls coach and witnessed 4 serious knee injuries, I protect the airborn shooter every time.

I would be curious how other varisty officials would interpret this play and call?

In essence, you have answered your own question.

SECTION 1 AIRBORNE SHOOTER

ART. 1 . . .

ART. 2 . . . The airborne shooter is considered to be in the act of shooting.

Guard's shot was blocked, and Guard was still airborne.
Was the ball stuffed or was it blocked after the release?
If the ball was released the Guard remains protected as an airborne shooter.

Well, I'd like to reply to this thread, but the OP asked for Varsity level replies only - so I guess I can't tell him that it's his judgment that matters here, not the guy sitting in the stands. Was the contact significant enough in your mind to call the foul? If yes, then call it and stick to your guns. If no, then listen to the Varsity guy in the stands. Too bad I can't tell the OP that...:rolleyes:

Crap! I hate it when that happens...

johnyd:

Whether it is a girls' game or a boys' game, varsity or below, the contact in the play you describe is a foul. While the block occured before the contact, one has to look at the entire play. B5 needs complete the play without making illegal contact with A1. If B5 cannot make the block without making contact with A1, then he/she has not played good defense. If the contact was made while A1 was still an airborne shooter, then B5's foul is a personal foul commited against a player in the act of shooting; if the contact occured after A1 had returned to the floor but before the ball becomes dead then B5's foul is a common foul.

MTD, Sr.

P.S. I am one of a dying breed of college officials (both men's and women's) that would make this call in a college game too because I still believe that B5 has to complete the block without making contact with the airborne shooter.

I agree with the growing consensus here. I would add only this: ignore the crowd. They stopped watching the play when their girl blocked the shot, and their eyes followed the ball. Even if they saw the contact, they're biased. Ignore the crowd.

Varsity official is a strange way to classify someone. I only work varsity games myself, but some of the people on this list work in areas where breaking into the varsity ranks could be harder. Or those people may be better trained.

I always protect the airborne shooter. A little bump? I'd pass. Player lands out of balance and control and knocks the other player over? Foul.

I work varsity games and I never give unsolicited advice. Smile, say "Thank you", and ignore him.

I'm not sure I'm "varsity enough" to answer this either, but I'm sure thinking a couple of things:

• The defender wasn't able to make the "clean block" without also making significant contact. So was it really a clean block?
• If the defender hadn't made the block, was the contact significant enough that you would have called it?

I had a block / charge where I called a block. I saw the video -- it looked like a charge from the angle shown on the video. It probably looked like a charge from various viewpoints in the stands.

It wasn't. I was there, in the position to see the play the best.

Officials who say you blew one from the stands would be just as pissed off if someone in the stands told them the same thing. It would be tempting to say that "it's easy to back-seat officiate from the stands" but politically it's better to say "thanks for your input" and make fun of the official in the car.

So you officiate differently in this sitch according to the sex of the players on the floor? Seems a bit biased to me.

I had a similar call last week. JV girls. 6'2" defender steps over to play help defense on a much smaller guard driving the lane. Defender jumps straight up, blocks the shot, shooter goes into the defender and being a lot smaller, goes to the floor due to the contact. Coach/crowd goes bananas when I don't blow the whistle. The defender clearly got to the spot first and could have easily taken a charge if she had chosen to.

I try my hardest to not penalize good defense. I'm only in my 2nd year so I may be showing my relative rookie status.

This being said, if the defender moves into the shooter and initiates the contact, blow the whistle, girls or boys.

A few years ago I had a similar thing.

110# point guard ran into vertical 175# post. Guard went down and lay on the floor.
I called a PC. It was one of those calls where the defender was not disadvantaged [more than 6-8"], but I had a player down, and I felt I needed to call something.
Point guard's Dad started coming down from the stands to talk to me, but he stopped.
In thinking about it, I think I still need to make the same call. :cool:

Yes. It is different. On average.

Boys can "play through" contact that sends some female players to the floor. Contact that puts a female player at a disadvantage can cause no disadvantage at all to a male player. On average.

In this area, some girls coaches have a different expectation, too, and right or wrong, it changes how games are called by some officials. They prefer "contact = foul" and some officials call the games that way. Not me.