Big Man Penalized by REFS?????

[OHBBREF]

Wow - so the whole advantage/disadvantage thing is not true?
Someone forgot to pass that one around.

First off we are talking post play here which has a whole different set of parameters for contact, we do allow a lot of contact here, the arm bar is legal, as is some leaning as long as there is still freedom of movement, we do not call the foul.

There is a lot we do not know here such as size of the big guy. If this guy is 6’10” 325 lbs playing against 5’ 11” 120 lbs players in the post there are going to be problems and the decision on what constitutes a foul are not going to seem equal.
What are the fouls offensive, defensive, holds, blocks, there are a lot of variables not mentioned. Is this kid swatting at trys for goal and getting called for arm contact? Is he not getting straight up in the air, a lot of big men have trouble lifting their arms above their heads.

Somebody saying things are unequal isn’t enough to jump on board the band wagon.

Rule citations that spell this out
Rule 4
SECTION 19 FOUL
A foul is an infraction of the rules which is charged and is penalized.
ART. 1 . . . A personal foul is a player foul which involves illegal contact with an opponent while the ball is live, which hinders an opponent from performing normal defensive and offensive movements. A personal foul also includes contact by or on an airborne shooter when the ball is dead.

SECTION 27 INCIDENTAL CONTACT
Incidental contact is contact with an opponent which is permitted and which does not constitute a foul.
ART. 2 . . . Contact which occurs unintentionally in an effort by an opponent to reach a loose ball, or contact which may result when opponents are in equally favorable positions to perform normal defensive or offensive movements, should not be considered illegal, even though the contact may be severe.
ART. 3 . . . Similarly, contact which does not hinder the opponent from participating in normal defensive or offensive movements should be considered incidental.


If there is a large disparity in size in most cases the bigger player is going to be able to “play through” some of the contact and will be expected to do so. While his contact on the little guy is going to have more of an effect on the little guy so it is going to get called a foul more often.
Some coaches will also tell his smaller players to exaggerate the results of that contact which might influence an official’s call, wrongly so, but it does happen.

But no way can you say that the contact of a 5” 5” 120 lb guy leaning on a 6’ 10” 320 lb guy is the same if you reverse the situation, therefore the calls can be different. That is the rule interpretation.

Having said that if the big guy is working hard and the defense is double and triple teaming him, illegally preventing him from getting to his spots, I am going to call those fouls. If tre is freedom of movemnt as long as he isn't forcing his way through people or displacing people I am not going to call that contact a foul.

So the coach needs to work with his big man to get him to play better defense with less contact and he will be better off, when he is a lot larger than the kids defending him, it will make him a better player now, and will help chances of being able to move on in the game.

[brettdj]

Originally Posted by rwest

Situation A: Big Man has position in the paint. Small point guard goes in for a layup. Contact squarely in the chest. Big man doesn't move. Small point guard bounces off of him. No call.

Situation B: Small point guard has position in the paint. Big man goes in for a layup. Contact squarely in the chest. Small point guard goes down. No call?
I don't think so.

Same exact play with different results gets a different call. It may be your pet peeve, but it is a fact that we are taught to use "advantage/disadvantage" and "displacement" to determine fouls. A Big Man can take more contact and not be disadvantaged or displaced. Coaches don't mind the advantage a big mans size gives him over smaller players. When it comes to contact, he can take more without a foul being called. Imagine calling a foul on the small guard for bumping the big man going in for a layup and the big man doesn't even move. Now, imagine the effect the Big man is going to have on the small guard in the same play. One was disadvantaged, the other was not.

( I am a player(small guy) not an official)
But it is usually
Situation A: Small guard bounces off, foul on big man
Situation B: Small guard to ground, foul on big man.

[deecee]

that just has to do with the official and his level of skill. It has no bearing on what should be called. In most cases, and players need to understand this, unless its a HS varsity contest or higher (this goes for wreck league as well) the quality is greatly diminished of the officiating staff. Its a fact of reality. Not to say all are bad, just overall the level is significantly lower in who takes their job seriously, as well as many other factors that are not dealt with at the higher, accountable levels of basketball.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by deecee

that just has to do with the official and his level of skill. It has no bearing on what should be called. In most cases, and players need to understand this, unless its a HS varsity contest or higher (this goes for wreck league as well) the quality is greatly diminished of the officiating staff. Its a fact of reality. Not to say all are bad, just overall the level is significantly lower in who takes their job seriously, as well as many other factors that are not dealt with at the higher, accountable levels of basketball.

This will depend on region. Around here, I haven't seen many JV refs who would call the foul without advantage.

[OHBBREF]

Situation A: Big Man has position in the paint. Small point guard goes in for a layup. Contact squarely in the chest. Big man doesn't move. Small point guard bounces off of him and goes down.

No call, foul on little guy are the correct choices but the perception you blew it will be based on the little guy getting bounced.



Situation B: Small point guard is clearly late as he slides in front of the Big man going in for a layup. Small point guard goes down and big guy lands on him.

Foul on the little guy is the correct call, but the perception again is that the big mean guy crushed the little guy and it has to be a foul on the big guy.
You can not have a no call here because you have two bodies on the floor as a result of the contact. You can not win here so all you can do is what is right.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by brettdj

( I am a player(small guy) not an official)
But it is usually
Situation A: Small guard bounces off, foul on big man
Situation B: Small guard to ground, foul on big man.

I had a situation where a Big Man was just standing there. The offensive player turned around and ran into him and bounced off. I made no call. As Scotty would say to Captain Kirk... "I can't change the laws of physics, man!". A object of smaller mass is going to bounce off of an object of larger mass unless the accleration of the smaller object is such that the force it generates is great enough to displace the larger object.

[Raymond]

I was a post player in my day. I tend to let big men battle big men. I have a quicker whistle when a guard comes down in there double-teaming.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by rwest

Situation A: Big Man has position in the paint. Small point guard goes in for a layup. Contact squarely in the chest. Big man doesn't move. Small point guard bounces off of him. No call.

Situation B: Small point guard has position in the paint. Big man goes in for a layup. Contact squarely in the chest. Small point guard goes down. No call?
I don't think so.

Same exact play with different results gets a different call. It may be your pet peeve, but it is a fact that we are taught to use "advantage/disadvantage" and "displacement" to determine fouls. A Big Man can take more contact and not be disadvantaged or displaced. Coaches don't mind the advantage a big mans size gives him over smaller players. When it comes to contact, he can take more without a foul being called. Imagine calling a foul on the small guard for bumping the big man going in for a layup and the big man doesn't even move. Now, imagine the effect the Big man is going to have on the small guard in the same play. One was disadvantaged, the other was not.

So Big Man catches pass in the low post and pivots to shoot a right handed Kareem-style-skyhook. Little guard is hanging on Big Man's left arm. Big Man shoots the right handed shot with left arm being drug towards ground. Obviously there was no advantage/disadvantage because the big, strong Big Man was able to complete his hook shot, so you would not call a foul, right?

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

OHBBREF,
I think that you are precisely the type of official that the coach is complaining about. If a big man is in the post getting pushed on all night long, you are not going to call the foul on the defenders simply because the post man is strong and not "looking like" he is getting pushed. Then, you are going to turn around and call the foul on the big post man when he bumps into a kid that weighs 80 pounds less -- THE SAME BUMP that you allowed the little post man get away with at the other end.

Basically, you are telling the big guy, "sorry, you are so big and strong, even if you are getting leaned on all night by four different guys, you are not moving, therefore, I will only call the fouls tonight on you."

I disagree with this mentality (I also disagree with the percentage of games that the team encountered this type of officiating -- all but two games does not sound reasonable). Getting physically beaten on all game long takes it toll. Just because the post man is strong enough to make the power lay-up with a guy hanging on his arm, doesn't mean the foul should not be called (the defender obviously did not gain an "advantage" because the post man still made the shot).

In case you have not seen the "next level" much, play in the post is awfully physical.

Flat out pushes by the big post man absolutely need to be called. Discriminating against a player because he is big and strong isn't fair either. If he is skilled enough to make the power lay-up with the player on his arm, he should be rewarded with a three point opportunity.

Strongly disagree.........it's all about advantage/disadvantage, I agree totally with OHBBREF. That said, I can recognize a foul no matter who it is on.

A friend was talking to a big ten ref who said if a Greg Oden type goes to the hole and some skinny point guard taps/bumps him.........he'd better hold his whistle if he wants to work that conference again.

I'm sure OHBBREF has seen plenty of play at the next level.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

So Big Man catches pass in the low post and pivots to shoot a right handed Kareem-style-skyhook. Little guard is hanging on Big Man's left arm. Big Man shoots the right handed shot with left arm being drug towards ground. Obviously there was no advantage/disadvantage because the big, strong Big Man was able to complete his hook shot, so you would not call a foul, right?

I'd call a foul there because he was placed at a disadvantage. He's balance would be affected. The shot was made more difficult. You can come up with plenty of plays were I would call a foul on the smaller player. I can come up with just as many where I wouldn't call a foul. I neve made a blanket statement. It depends on the play. But I can guarantee you there are plenty of times where contact by a big man on a smaller player is going to get called for a foul but the same contact the other way wont get a whistle. You might not like it but that's how we are taught to officiate the game. And its the correct way, in my opinion. Remember not all contact is a foul. You have to judge advantage/disadvantage and displacement. If you call a foul every time there is contact then you are interrupting the game.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by rwest

You are interrupting the game.

You were doing fine until you made this statement. There are certain "buzzwords", i.e. reach in, over the back, etc., that change otherwise low-key Forum members into raging pit bulls. Unfortunately you said the secret word, and, unfortunately, again, you are not about to win one-hundred dollars. I suggest that you legally change your Forum username, and apply to the Federal Witness Protection Program, or at the minimum, duck. I would have thought that you would have known better after 475 posts. You're not a newbie anymore. I think that that's going to count against you. You will never become an esteemed member by making statements like that.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

You were doing fine until you made this statement. There are certain "buzzwords", i.e. reach in, over the back, etc., that change otherwise low-key Forum members into raging pit bulls. Unfortunately you said the secret word, and, unfortunately, again, you are not about to win one-hundred dollars. I suggest that you legally change your Forum username, and apply to the Federal Witness Protection Program, or at the minimum, duck. I would have thought that you would have known better after 475 posts. You're not a newbie anymore. I think that that's going to count against you. You will never become an esteemed member by making statements like that.

You're funny! I have no problem with anything that I've said. You've never heard of "gameus interruptus". It's not a bad officiating practice to teach officials not to interrupt the flow of the game with contact that is not a foul. I'm not saying we don't call a foul just so we don't interrupt the game. I'm saying we don't interrupt the game by calling contact that is not a foul. Why do you have a problem with that?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by rwest

"Gameus interruptus".

A prescription for Viagra should take care of that. See your family doctor. And I still think that you had better take cover. I think that I'm going to take a neutral stand here, like Switzerland, and just sit back, and enjoy the war.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

A prescription for Viagra should take care of that. See your family doctor. And I still think that you had better take cover. I think that I'm going to take a neutral stand, like Switzerland, here, and just sit back, and enjoy the war.

That's so out of character for you! What is wrong with what I said? I'd really like to know. All I'm saying is don't interrupt the flow of the game by calling fouls that have no bearing on the game. Fouls that don't fall into the advantage/disadvantage or displacement categories. What's wrong with that?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by rwest

All I'm saying is don't interrupt the flow of the game by calling fouls that have no bearing on the game. Fouls that don't fall into the advantage/disadvantage or displacement categories.

These two statements say it all. Most of what you say, if I can read between the lines, makes a lot of sense, i.e. calling, or not calling, fouls based on advantage, and disadvantage. The problem is that we call, or don't call, fouls, based on advantage, and disadvantage, not to keep the game flowing, but to make sure that each team has a fair chance to win based on how well that team plays that night. We interrupt the game everytime we blow the whistle. That's part of the game of basketball. As an official, we should never, never, worry about interrupting the flow of the game.