Fouled after landing

[Vinski]

An earlier thread got me thinking about a very plausible scenario, but one that I don’t recall seeing or at least being called in my short carrier.

Scenario:
Three point attempt: A1 goes up, releases shot and lands. B1 then spins to box him out but is too aggressive and clearly fouls A1. The ball then goes in and the ref calls the foul and scores the bucket. However, at the time of the foul the shooter was back on the ground after the shot, so it’s not a shooting foul. Also, team A is in bonus, so he gets a one-and-one or two shots. We would have what would appear like a 5 point play. I believe this is all correct but would seem odd. I’m sure some coaches and many fans would perceive this as A1 getting two shots after getting fouled on a made 3 pointer.

Is this all correct? Comments?

[Adam]

yes, it's correct. Tell the coach it was after the shot.

If the coach doesn't get it, you may also have to explain that a rebounder doesn't get to knock a player down just because he has position.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Vinski

An earlier thread got me thinking about a very plausible scenario, but one that I don’t recall seeing or at least being called in my short carrier.

Scenario:
Three point attempt: A1 goes up, releases shot and lands. B1 then spins to box him out but is too aggressive and clearly fouls A1. The ball then goes in and the ref calls the foul and scores the bucket. However, at the time of the foul the shooter was back on the ground after the shot, so it’s not a shooting foul. Also, team A is in bonus, so he gets a one-and-one or two shots. We would have what would appear like a 5 point play. I believe this is all correct but would seem odd. I’m sure some coaches and many fans would perceive this as A1 getting two shots after getting fouled on a made 3 pointer.

Is this all correct? Comments?

You're correct that this is not a shooting foul and if applicable, A1 shoots the bonus - even if it does seem odd.

If you voice clearly while reporting the foul, the coaches should be understanding what the call is (though they may not agree), since they'll likely be listening to you report.

I've had this foul before and through experience, we can tell when a coach isn't clear on a certain rule. By choosing your words carefully (in the style of Ed Hochuli), you can diffuse some comments or questions that a coach may have.

As for the fans, meh. If they get it, then fine. If they don't, it gives them soemthing to talk about on the drive home.

[williebfree]

FORMER air-borne shooter (now player A1, just like A2-A5) is fouled. Bonus in effect. FT awarded accordingly.

Who cares what the fans think!

If you feel you need to inform the coach, keep it brief.

"B1 pushed A1 AFTER he returned to the floor. Common foul, bonus is in effect, A1 is shooting 1-and-1 (or 2)"

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

yes, it's correct. Tell the coach it was after the shot.

Good answer. I sometimes report the foul: "During the rebound..."

I was going to ask whether the OP had ever seen it called in his long carrier, but decided against it.

[williebfree]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Good answer. I sometimes report the foul: "During the rebound..."

I was going to ask whether the OP had ever seen it called in his long carrier, but decided against it.

Do they play basketball in 53' semi-trailers? Or is OP in the Navy and at sea?

[Vinski]

Thanks for the replies. Looks like clarity in reporting is the key here.

[Vinski]

Originally Posted by williebfree

Do they play basketball in 53' semi-trailers? Or is OP in the Navy and at sea?

Stinkin' spell check.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by williebfree

Do they play basketball in 53' semi-trailers? Or is OP in the Navy and at sea?

The vessel was travelling east. The release of the 3-pointer came from today, but the foul came after the ship crossed the IDL, and happened yesterday. Since yesterday, A was not in the bonus, no shots were awarded.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by Vinski

An earlier thread got me thinking about a very plausible scenario, but one that I don’t recall seeing or at least being called in my short career.

Scenario:
Three point attempt: A1 goes up, releases shot and lands. B1 then spins to box him out but is too aggressive and clearly fouls A1. The ball then goes in and the ref calls the foul and scores the bucket. However, at the time of the foul the shooter was back on the ground after the shot, so it’s not a shooting foul. Also, team A is in bonus, so he gets a one-and-one or two shots. We would have what would appear like a 5 point play. I believe this is all correct but would seem odd. I’m sure some coaches and many fans would perceive this as A1 getting two shots after getting fouled on a made 3 pointer.

Is this all correct? Comments?

The other way to look at this scenario is the case in which the shot does NOT go in. If you feel it odd that the player would get more than one shot in your initial scenario, it would follow that it would make sense that you would award a rebounder (since the shooter has already landed) three FTs.

This scenario is even more odd. Hence, the rules being as they are.

[Fritz]

Where you may see confusion is when A1 attempts a 3-pt shot as B1 is rushing toward her for the block. B1 jumps, misses the ball and comes down, making contact with A1 as she returns to the floor as well. Though A1 has returned to the floor, and then contact occurs, I often see this called as a foul in the act of shooting.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

yes, it's correct. Tell the coach it was after the shot.

If the coach doesn't get it, you may also have to explain that a rebounder doesn't get to knock a player down just because he has position.

Snaqs:

He should also be prepared to hear the HC tell how that was good boxing out technique, .

MTD, Sr.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Snaqs:

He should also be prepared to hear the HC tell how that was good boxing out technique, .

MTD, Sr.

I see you've had that coach, too.

[Amesman]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I see you've had that coach, too.

That's like one I had last weekend. Super-fast guard during a FTA zips to the front of the rim before anyone else, yet clearly too early. Tweet -- violation, let's reshoot.

Coach from the near bench: He's just faster than anyone else!

Me: Good. Then he can wait until he's supposed to and STILL get there before everybody else.

Coach: You must reading too much of those guys posting all the time at officiating.com!