Rebounder Falls on Defender

[mutantducky]

in those rare cases when it does happen yeah I just might ignore it. At least the call doesn't seem too controversial. From everything I've seen about the game WF outplayed Duke and they broke down defensively on that last play which Dicky V called. he got that one right

[amusedofficial]

Worse was the commentary from a certain color announcer annoucing that a charge was the right call when the overhead clearly showed the defender turning forward into the offensive player after getting LGP.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by fiasco

Nevada already gave us a rule reference stating that a player on the floor does not have LGP.

Do you really need a rule reference stating that if a defender displaces an offensive player while not having LGP a foul should be called?

Yup, a foul should have been called on the Dook player. See:

A.R.98 B1 takes a spot on the playing court before A1 jumps to catch a pass. (1) A1 returns to the playing court and lands on B1, or (2) B1 moves to a new spot and while A1 is airborne. A1 returns to the floor on one foot and charges into B1.
RULING: in both (1) and (2), the foul shall be on A1 because B1 is entitled to that spot on the floor provided that he/she gets there legally before the offensive player becomes airborne.

Note that in AR98 #1, it doesn't specify whether the "spot on the playing court" taken by B1 is laying down or standing up. Note that "jumps to catch a pass" is no different than "jumps to catch a rebound". Note that A.R. 97 refers to an offensive player on the floor moving into a defensive player, not an airborne player landing on a defender.

I didn't see the play...but if the WF player was on the floor before the Dook player jumped and the Dook player didn't jump straight up and down, AR98 sureasheck might be applicable.


Also, FYI, there was an NCAA Directive issued back in 1990 that is still in force:
NCAA Directive 113: If there is any doubt when contact occurs, the foul should automatically be charged to the precious little Dookie player, not the opponent. In addition, a technical foul should automatically also be charged to the whiny little hemmorhoid that coaches Duke.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I'm not disputing the facts of the play. I'm saying that I'm not sure that the NCAA desires this play ruling to apply to that situation. It may be intended only for the situation in which a dribbler or other non-airborne player trips over a fallen opponent.

Yup, AR 98 might be applicable for an airborne player who didn't jump vertically.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

In addition, a technical foul should automatically also be charged to the whiny little hemmorhoid that coaches Duke.

OK, that made me laugh!

Although, Coach K was very reserved after the loss and I didn't see him whine or complain at all. I think he was more disappointed at the easy score at the end and figured - to lose on a basic, simple play like that (regardless of the "slight push"), they didn't deserve to win.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by fiasco

Nevada already gave us a rule reference stating that a player on the floor does not have LGP.

Do you really need a rule reference stating that if a defender displaces an offensive player while not having LGP a foul should be called?

Since when does LGP apply to rebounders? WF player was the floor and rebounder landed on him and fell. A.R. 97 does not address rebounding action.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Freddy

This is very close to a question on our MHSAA test last year on which the state dictated that "travel" was the proper call.

Opinions around the state varied, due to many who consider that the player on the floor has committed a blocking foul, since he did not have legal guarding position (4-23-2 was cited as evidence contrary to the state ruling: "To obtain LGP, a. the guard must have both feet touching the playing court.")

I'm not sure what "guarding position" has to do with it.

It was a loose ball rebounded with the Wake player occupying a spot that the Duke player landed on. Words being thrown around on both threads discussing this like "the defensive player" mean nothing here. There is no defense. It was the rebound of a shot.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by fiasco

Nevada already gave us a rule reference stating that a player on the floor does not have LGP.

Do you really need a rule reference stating that if a defender displaces an offensive player while not having LGP a foul should be called?

Again, he's not a "defender" and LGP has nothing to do with this.

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

NCAA Basketball

2009 MEN’S & WOMEN’S CASE BOOK, page 40

A.R. 97.
B1 slips to the floor in the free throw lane. A1 (with his/her
back to B1, who is prone) receives a pass, turns and, in his or
her attempt to drive to the basket, trips and falls over B1.
RULING: Foul on B1, who has taken an illegal defensive position.
(Rule 4-35.4.a)

I concur on this as well.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

I concur on this as well.

But it doesn't apply to the Duke/WF situation.

[bc7]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

.

Right now, you seem like a whining Duke fanboy.

Hey! There's nothing wrong with being a Duke fanboy!

Are we going to discuss whether or not the Wake player pushed off to get that open on the final shot?

I didn't think so.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by bc7

Are we going to discuss whether or not the Wake player pushed off to get that open on the final shot?

I didn't think so.

I brought up my opinion in post #35. What say you?

[cmathews]

hey the kid that made the final shot is a kid from Wyoming....not often we get kids in the ACC let alone that get to hit a winning shot against Duke, so being from Wyoming nope, looked clean to me

[dahoopref]

Well here's the play in question. It happens at the 3:08 mark of this clip.

You make the call.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOi2kelADoY

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bc7

Are we going to discuss whether or not the Wake player pushed off to get that open on the final shot?

I didn't think so.

After viewing the clip.....

There's nothing even close to a foul on that play. You won't find an official anywhere in the world that'll give you that call, fanboy. If they did, it would be their last game at that level.