A1 goes in for a layup. B1 is standing directly under the basket and is not moving. A1 makes the layup and lands into B1 and bodies hit the floor. I need some guidance in making this call. My concern is, should A1 be allowed space to land since B1 is directly under the basket?

Semper Fi

By rule this is a PC on A1, both NF & NCAA men. What gets
called is a different story, I'm a no-call type of guy
in these cases. Usually. I understand that by interp this
is a block on B1 under NCAA women's rules.

rburn,

You are correct in your assumption. Once a shooter goes into the air legally to attempt a shot, the shooter has a right to come back to the floor. If any call is to be made here, you have to call a BLOCKING foul on the defender.
However, you can pass on the call, depending on the contact that happens and make a "no call" on this play. I hope this helps. Good Luck

John Sandlin

This is a charge in NFHS (high school) rules. There is no special provision about being under the basket. The rule is designed to penalize an offensive player who displaces a defender who has legally established their location.

I am assuming that B established position prior to A becoming an airborne shooter.

Z

[Edited by zebraman on May 30th, 2002 at 12:45 PM]

This topic always generates some heat. By rule (and backed up by case plays and A.R.'s), if the defender gets to that spot before the shooter leaves the ground, and then there is contact that warrants a foul, the foul is on the shooter, regardless of where "that spot" is. There is no exception for a defender who has gained legal guarding position directly under the basket.

Many people will argue that the spirit of the rule dictates that an official should not call a PC when the defender is directly under the basket b/c "he can't be playing defense there"; therefore, he shouldn't be rewarded. As I said, by rule, this is an incorrect interpretation.

The bottom line, however, is that many assignors want the rule to be interpreted that way. So you need to find out from your board interpreter and/or your local assignor how the play is to be called -- and then call it that way.

Chuck

John, I'm not sure if you mean what you wrote here, but if what you say is true, then there would NEVER be a player control foul on a shooter. The shooter has a right to return to the spot from which he jumped (principle of verticality), but if he's moving forward into a defender, he has no right to land in the defender's spot.

Chuck

Actually there is an exception, Chuck...in NCAA Women's rules and interp, that would be a blocking foul on the defender under the basket - unless the offensive player was driving parallel to the baseline...not meaning to argue merits of the ruling, just correcting your statement about the no exceptions...NFHS - there are no exceptions to the spot on the floor...NCAA Men - I don't know...NCAA Women - I already stated thir exception...

Rocky, thanks for the heads-up. I only do men, so I answer with men's interpretations in my head. I always forget that the women's side often does things differently. Sorry about that.

Chuck

AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! !!

"I only do men"

Anything ELSE you want to tell us, Chuck? ;)

ROFLMAO!!!!!! You got me good, Drake. Maybe I'll just go edit that last post now. . . :D

Chuck

Hey! What's said on the board, STAYS on the board!
(insert you're own favorite mafioso accent):cool:

Hmmmm... that's not exactly true. If the defender had established position prior the shooter leaving the floor, then the defender is entitled to the space. He DOES not have to give the shooter room to land.

NFHS, NCAA Men's, FIBA, and NCAA Women's (Barb Jacobs please read the rules book before you make stupid interpretations that cannot be defended by the rules):

PLAYER CONTROL FOUL!!!

Befor the hate mail starts let me correct myself: CHARGING FOUL and common foul under all four codes. PLAYER CONTROL FOUL under NFHS and NCAA Women's.

Good grief...every time this topic come up you have to make some Barb Jacobs comment. Get over it.

I second that. If it has been interpreted as the way the rule will be administered, I thought that you, of all people, would defend it to the death.

Chuck

I agree with you that if your assignor wants you to call it a certain way, then you need to call it that way.

What frustrates me is assignors or officials that decide to call plays differently from what the casebook specifies. The block/charge call under the basket is a prime example. I have no problem with refs/coaches/players that think that you're not playing defense under the basket and that any calls should be a block on the defense. I'm in the other camp, that you should be able to play defense anywhere on the court. But until the casebook is changed I think that it needs to be called as the case book specifies and not according to our personal preference.

Just a Coach