Triping Over Players on Floor...

[slow whistle]

Agree with your statement, but how is mine incorrect? If you are just standing (or in this case lying) somewhere and not guarding anybody then how is LGP relevant?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by slow whistle

Agree with your statement, but how is mine incorrect? If you are just standing (or in this case lying) somewhere and not guarding anybody then how is LGP relevant?

It's not really, but the question is really moot, I think. Maybe he was guarding him (trying to get the ball, perhaps), maybe he wasn't. That's not the key; the key is whether he was moving.

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

It's not really, but the question is really moot, I think. Maybe he was guarding him (trying to get the ball, perhaps), maybe he wasn't. That's not the key; the key is whether he was moving.

OK perhaps I should clarify then b/c I assumed he wasn't trying to guard him. If he is just laying there not trying to guard him then LGP is irrelevant b/c he isn't trying to guard him. If he is laying there trying to guard him then LGP is irrlevant b/c he isn't moving. In any event LGP is irrelevant. Better?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by slow whistle

OK perhaps I should clarify then b/c I assumed he wasn't trying to guard him. If he is just laying there not trying to guard him then LGP is irrelevant b/c he isn't trying to guard him. If he is laying there trying to guard him then LGP is irrlevant b/c he isn't moving. In any event LGP is irrelevant. Better?

I don't think it's ever relevant whether he's trying to guard him.

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I don't think it's ever relevant whether he's trying to guard him.

Just to take it a step further though, what is your definition of "moving"? What if he is trying to get up, is he moving?

[Kelvin green]

My question?

Did A trip over B on the floor? Or
Did B trip A while on the floor?

In my mind there is a difference. We dont call a tripping foul everytime somone falls down do we?

B1 was not flopping, etc... B1 was on the floor going after a loose ball making a legitimate attempt..would not B1 be allowed the opportunity to get up etc? (he was at the spot first?)

If A tripped on the player, I'd not be very inclined to call the foul

[mbyron]

Had players littering the floor in my game last night. Here's one:

Long, floating pass to A1 halfway down the court. A1 and B1 bump shoulders as they both go for the ball. A1 catches the pass, lands on his feet, sorta falls/sits down, and ends up lying on the court.

I whistle, and the B coach (right behind me) shouts "No!" until I signal travel. Then he's like, "Oh, OK," and we go the other way...

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Kelvin green

Did A trip over B on the floor? Or
Did B trip A while on the floor? In my mind there is a difference. We don't call a tripping foul everytime someone falls down do we?

Similar to what I say, usually to coaches who politely ask: "There's a difference between tripping, and being tripped".

[AKOFL]

A1 rebounds the ball and takes off heading for his basket. B3 is standing at the free-throw line with his back to the play. A1 runs into B3 displacing him. What do you have? Now say B3 was laying on the floor when A1 trips over him. What do you have now? Is B3 responsible for contact in either of these sitchs?

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by AKOFL

A1 rebounds the ball and takes off heading for his basket. B3 is standing at the free-throw line with his back to the play. A1 runs into B3 displacing him. What do you have? Now say B3 was laying on the floor when A1 trips over him. What do you have now? Is B3 responsible for contact in either of these sitchs?

PC in first example, probably nothing in second...if he just trips on him that probably isn't enough contact for a foul and there is no advantage gained....if he goes off the top rope and lands on him then I probably have something...

[mdray]

from my original sit: when A1 hits the floor, in control of the ball, are you saying "play on"? you can't be calling a traveling violation, could you?

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by mdray

from my original sit: when A1 hits the floor, in control of the ball, are you saying "play on"? you can't be calling a traveling violation, could you?

I wasn't going beyond the contact, but if A1 trips, controls/holds the ball and goes to the floor then yes I have a travel...how could you have nothing there? What if A1 goes down the lane, brushes the shoulder of B1 who is standing still in the lane (you judge to be no foul either way) and as a result of the contact loses his balance and takes three steps with the ball? What do you have?

[mdray]

if B1 is laying on the floor, right behind and out of the field of vision of A1, and non-incidental contact (A1 falling to the floor) occurs, that's a blocking foul on B1(caused by an illegal screen if you will)

[Adam]

Originally Posted by mdray

if B1 is laying on the floor, right behind and out of the field of vision of A1, and non-incidental contact (A1 falling to the floor) occurs, that's a blocking foul on B1(caused by an illegal screen if you will)

Not if A1 has the ball. If A1 has the ball, time and distance are not required.

If A1 does not have the ball, time and distance could be a factor.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by mdray

if B1 is laying on the floor, right behind and out of the field of vision of A1, and non-incidental contact (A1 falling to the floor) occurs, that's a blocking foul on B1(caused by an illegal screen if you will)

Case 10.6.1E, last in the 2004-05 case book (typos are mine):B1 attempts to steal the ball from stationary A1 who is holding the ball. b1 misses the ball and falls to the floor. In dribbling away, A1 contacts' B1's leg, loses control of the ball and falls to the floor. RULING: No infraction or foul has occurred and play continues. Unless B1 made an effrot to trip or block A1, he/she is entitled to a position on the court even if it is momentarily lying on the floor after falling down.

That should clear up how the FED *wanted* the play called. Open for discussion, of course, is the unresolved "are case plays that are no longer published still valid?"