Elbow Swinging II
 

A 1 is bring the ball up the court. B1 tightly defending but legal. As A1 gets just over half court, picks up his dribble, and chins the ball swinging both elbows clearing space.

B1 almost falls backwards (tripping over his own feet) trying to get out of the way. I called a violation for excessive swinging of the elbows. Coach A is very upset, the player acts as if you doesn't know what he did wrong, etc.

After the game we are discussing the play. One official who didn't work the game but saw the play thought a foul or travel would have been a better call. He said he hadn't seen that call for years. I told him I didn't see a travel or contact that was a foul.

Should we make up a call that would be easier to sell?

No, sounds like you had the right call.

Well, I saw the play last Wednesday when one of my partners called it. It was an obvious call. I was right next to the coach as we were putting the ball back in play and when I explained the call to him, of course, he had "never heard of it before". So therefore it was a bad call. :rolleyes:

The only thing that gets me is when there is contact and the foul is called simply because the defender was all up in the offensive players grill. Just the fact that there is contact with the elbow does not necessitate a foul. For that matter a hard rotation of the ball from one side to the others might look like bad but if its in the normal movement of the body and just proper technique its not a violation either.

I have seen both called simply because the elbow was out during a ball rotation. There is no provision that states the elbows must be tucked at all times. Sometimes a players will take a nasty elbow to the face that is entirely his fault. Doesn't mean its a foul or violation. This is also where judgement does come in.

Is there a space requirement the defender must give the offensive player?

How Socratic.

The defender has every right to get in the grill of the offensive player. It's called "dee-fense."

I hate it when I call an offensive foul or elbow violation here and the coach is crying "get him off him." "Coach, I'll ask them to stop playing defense, but I can't enforce that."*

* Things I wish I could say.

No purchase necessary.
 

If the elbow enters the defender's "cylinder" and hits him in the face, I've got a player control foul, at the least. If the defender is sticking his nose into the offensive player's "cylinder" and hits his nose against the offensive player's elbow, I've probably got nothing, except an upset coach, and an upset player.

yes thats what i am trying to say except you said it better. and by cylinder than means circular and i allow the offensive player room to pivot.

Objects in mirror may be closer than they appear.
 

Not if he pivots into the defender's cylinder. If a defender is just standing, let's say, 18 inches, from a rebounder, and the rebounder, not knowing that the defender was there, simply pivots, without excessively swinging the elbows, and hits the defender, with an elbow, in the face, the I'm calling a player control foul.

so the defensive players cylinder has more rights than the offensive players? i dont buy that

Not what he said. You have the right to your space. Before the O player pivots, he isn't in the D players space. When he does pivot he enters the D players space. Who created the contact? That is all you need to ask.

Once again, deecee, you are incorrect. That is why everyone in this thread is disagreeing with your position. The defender is not required to give the offensive player with the ball any time or distance. The defender can legally be as close to the opposing player as he can get without making contact. If the offensive player then pivots and causes contact which places the defender at a disadvantage, the proper call is a player control foul.

I think it's time to find another line of work if you are even remotely considering the above option...

Excessive Swinging of Elbows
 

Getting back to the original post...I have been officiating for four years and have found that this call (excessive swinging of the elbows violation) is one that gives me and my partners a lot grief with the coaches. Simply put...the coaches don't know this rule. I commonly get the, "I have never heard of that before" or the "show me in the rule book where that is..." or the "there was no contact...how can that be a violation???", etc....

Coaches have the same rule book that I have. It couldn't be clearer that excessive swinging of the elbows is a violation. I believe it was changed a few years back from a technical foul to a violation so that more officials would call this to help prevent contact/injury. The only way that coaches and players will learn is if we make the call consistently.

Surely you jest! ;)

And don't call me Shirley!

But, I agree, like the "player being out of bounds" violation, it's seldom called.

[quote=rhartod;581126]"show me in the rule book where that is..."[quote]


9-13 coach...

My contention is not one that I agree/disagree with anyone. It is that 9 out of 10 times unless it is blatant then we have no call or defensive foul called.

I practice it is easy to say that here it is but here is where there is a big disconnect from rule book to reality.

Deecee,

Maybe where you are, and if that's truly the case in your area then the officials making these calls need some serious clinic time on proper rules application.

Go back a few posts to what w_sohl and Nevadaref said:

"Who created the contact?"
"The defender is not required to give the offensive player with the ball any time or distance. The defender can legally be as close to the opposing player as he can get without making contact. If the offensive player then pivots and causes contact which places the defender at a disadvantage, the proper call is a player control foul."

These are the key elements that need to be applied, not some arbitrary interpretation the officials come up with on their own. It's absolutely wrong to penalize the defense for illegal contact initiated by an offensive player.

With respect to calling a violation for "excessive swinging of the arms/elbows (without contact)" per 9-13, the key word is "excessive". The purpose of this rule is to prevent the action of swinging the arms/elbows by the offensive player to clear space between them & the defender(s). Swinging arms and elbows are flat out dangerous. I'd much rather call a violation before contact, than wait for the contact and have to call either a player control, intentional or flagrant foul.

I agree. I always base my calls on advantage/disadvantage and who was the initiator of the contact. I am just saying that I personally allow an offensive player the right to pivot within reason and contact that happens here I usually no call.

It goes back to why is this contact MORE severe than other contact that we no call. Because it just happens to occur on the face? where and how do we judge severity of contact based on different parts of the body?

This is a similar argument we had to where we were going over a kick versus a punch. Some were judging them differently. I would have a hard time calling a foul either way on a clean pivot that causes contact, and is within the offensive players cylinder and the defensive player was in a legal position. My opinion is that contact is incindental.

If, however, I feel as though the contact is NOT incidental then more than likely I have a PC. If I feel its Malicious then I have an intentional or flagrant. If its excessive and there is no contact then I have no problem with the violation.

I am just arguing that so far on this thread it almost seems like a certainty that this type of contact HAS to be a foul. My position is, sometimes yes, and sometimes its incidental. Officials will take from this discussion, if that is the point and some will take it as an absolute, that ANY contact with the defenders face or head by the offensive player will be a PC foul, and we no that is not true.

So Billy and Nevada I am not disagreeing with the rule. I just interpret it a bit differently. And I do want to make a note that I am differentiating between pivoting within reason and legally to pivoting with the elbows extended simply to clear space between them and the defender.

deecee, I don't understand who two players can have the right to the same space. If an offensive player pivots into a defensive player's rightful space, it's not a clean pivot. How can it be?
The rules specifically say time and distance are not factors when the guarded player has the ball.

I tell my players...
 

don't guard them with your face. Obviously not right after one of them has been elbowed in the nose. :)

And if one of mine accidentally elbows a defender in the face and she was not excessively swinging her elbows, I tell her, "She shouldn't have been guarding you with her face."

But as I mentioned in the first elbow swinging thread- all my defender has to do is change her arm position to cross her arms at the wrist, stick her open hands up in the players face to obstruct vision, and now the elbows can't contact my players face without first hitting forearms or wrists.

I had a play after a rebound where A1 (w/ball) elbowed B1 (who was behind A1) in the ribs. I called PC.

Team A HC yells at me "That's was a good call but you need to get him off him". :confused:

How close is she getting to the face; could be a T.

We are discusing two different things here, a violation which falls under the rule below and specifically says that Feinting or moving it to prevent a held ball or loss of control shall not be considered excessive.

Which I would presume to mean that if the defender is trying to get to the ball, the offensive player can pivot or move the ball to maintain control exempt from this guidline. If the defender is just standing there with their arms elevated in perfect defensive position then we could have an issue.

SECTION 13 EXCESSIVE SWINGING OF ARM(S)/ELBOW(S)
ART. 1 . . . A player shall not excessively swing his/her arms(s) or elbow(s), even without contacting an opponent.
ART. 2 . . . A player may extend arm(s) or elbow(s) to hold the ball under the chin or against the body.
ART. 3 . . . Action of arm(s) and elbow(s) resulting from total body movements as in pivoting or movement of the ball incidental to feinting with it, releasing it, or moving it to prevent a held ball or loss of control shall not be considered excessive. PENALTY:(Section 13) The ball is dead when the violation occurs and is awarded to the opponents for a throw-in from the designated out-of-bounds spot nearest the violation. (See 6-7-9 Exception d)

With regard to a foul either PC or on the defense, that determination is made based on the players position on the floor as well as the advantage disadvantage principles we abide by, and if the swing of the elbows is excessive then the foul would need to be called Intentional/flagrant if PC.

What people fail to realize in most cases based on the Fed rule, if the defender is trying to get at the ball the offensive player has the right to move the ball around to avoid the defenders aggression, and it is not considered excessive. When there is contact within the vertical plane of the offensive player the foul would be on the defense. If the offensive player pivots to the defender and contacts them it would be player control.

This rule is not called more often IMHO because it is misunderstood, the time when people want it called is usually when it should not be called.

Nope, intentional and flagrant fouls cannot be PC fouls.

The contact certainly can be deemed intentional or flagrant, but that would then result in two FTs for the offended player.

Correct my choice of type of foul was worded incorrectly should have said "If charged to the offensive player."

I had this same exact play in my girls 3a regional last night and I ended up calling an offensive foul because the offense made contact with the defense with her elbow and the defenders chin. The defender went down and the call had to be made. The coach of the team I called the foul on said nothing when I made it. Also talked to a state finals official that was at the game and he said it was an excellent call also.

I would think that if some kind of contact is made in the scenario's in this thread something has to be called a foul on defense or offense, or if you have excessive swinging then call a violation. I would hate for this to have happened and nothing called.

contact violation?????

Sorry cleaned it up for ya...

You gotta watch out for these guys (and gals)...they ain't kidding around if you use, like, bad English and stuff. ;)

Congrats on what looked like a great championship game! #1 team gets beat by 1.

Let me ask you, then. A1 gets a rebound, B1 standing, leaning over A1 invading his rightful space. A1 pivots, elbows out but not swinging them excessively, hitting B1 square in the jaw with his elbow.

What are you going to call, since you have to have something?

Milles Lane to give an eight count? :eek:

Like I said if you have to call a foul on the defense then that is the call. If you are invading the space of the offense that would not be legal guarding position would it?

Then be prepared for the defensive teams coach to come unglued.

Tell me about it. Pretty harsh in here.;)

I'd come unglued, too. There was no advantage gained on this, the offended player (the offense here) was not hurt nor displaced nor impeded. It's a no-call by rule, and a lot easier to explain to the coach.

Would leaning into the offense's rightful space be legal guarding position?

Wouldn't that be the same as if A1 goes up for a shot and B1 doesn't have his/her arms straight up and makes contact with A1's arm on the shot? Then you would have a foul on B1 for that wouldn't you?

LGP is not relevant for determining if there was any advantage. LGP is not relevant to this play.

If it affects the shot, yes. If it doesn't affect the shot, then no. Not all contact is a foul, by rule there must be some sort of advantage for it to be a foul.

4-27-3 "Contact which does not hinder the opponent from participating in normal defensive or offensive movements should be considered incidental.

I have to disagree with you on LGP not being relevant. By the way I am taking what you said is that B1 is invading the space by leaning over, so that possibly means that A1 has to be leaning and not being able to stand straight and possibly not be able to make a normal basketball move there fore in my eyes B1 is gaining an advantage by doing this.

Maybe I am taking what you said out of context of what you mean. I think this is probably a call that has to be seen in actuality before you can make any call on it.

A1's pivot was not hindered. Upon contact, B1 recoils and A1 is able to complete his motion without hinderance.

By not relevant, I mean it's not relevant in determining whether or not the contact warrants a foul. It might be relevant in determining who is responsible for contact, but if there's no advantage, there's no foul.

Ok then I understand where your coming from after these statements. Just from your initial post is what I was going on, but I am sure you meant that in your first post.

Fair enough. I think LGP is overused. I'm seeing B1 standing stationary guarding A1, so LGP isn't really an issue.

In our area most of the guys call advantage/disadvantage pretty much all the time. I know I call alot of it and try having players play through stuff when they can. But like I said I think this call would have to be made in person instead of trying to explain it on the net.

How close?
 

I'd guesstimate maybe 12-18 inches away.

Please spell my man's name correctly. BTW there is an article about his current situation and his family in the current issue of RM.

Sounds good. I was just curious, as 3-4 inches would probably be a T.

Lets break this down

1) Excessive swinging of the elbows (THE VIOLATION) is a non basketball play. Look at the definition as posted above...

2) Verticality does have to do with LGP. It's in the definition of Verticality

3) Some here need to review 4-45....

Verticality applies to legal position 4-45-1 also goes on and states LGP must be obtained initiatlly and movement thereafter must be legal.

That being said... I completely disagree with Deecee. There is a difference between excessively swinging an elbow and pivoting and hitting a defender with the elbow.

I know how much we all (in the US) like FIBA rules bit they have a pretty good definition of the vertical cylinder

Cylinder principle
The cylinder principle is defined as the space within an imaginary cylinder occupied by a player on the floor. It includes the space above the player and is limited to:
• The front by the palms of the hands,
• The rear by the buttocks, and
• The sides by the outside edge of the arms and legs.
The hands and arms may be extended in front of the torso no further than the
position of the feet, with the arms bent at the elbows so that the forearms and hands are raised. The distance between his feet will vary according to his height. (we all know in NFHS this is no more than shoulder width)

When the offensive player has the ball and his elbows cocked, the elbows may be in the vertical plane, but when the offensive player takes the step and pivots like they do a lot (extending out and pivoting) the elbows are no longer in the cylinder and foul will be on offense.... This is where refereeing the defense is critical because then you know what A does to B...

If someone takes a shot with the elbow- You cant go advantage/disadvantage) This is a foul that has to be called. If you dont you'll get an escalation....

There is nothing that allows an offensive player to pivot within reason....If the offensive player pivots into a player who is playing appropriate defense, dont reward the offense by letting them pivot and use elbows. If you dont call it, it becomes a hughe advantage later in the game because the defense will not play defense thinking they wont get any calls.

Never penalize good and proper defense

May be too intense for some viewers
 

Check this out. A1 gets a rebound and pivots with his elbows out. The pivot is 180 degrees, as is the arc of the elbow swing, so it's not excessive swinging. At the same time, B1, trying to deny the outlet pass, takes a step toward A1, and A1's moving elbow meets B1's moving face, at the same time.

1) What do have?

2) Does it matter if B1 is in a great deal of pain, while A1 is just standing there?

3) Does it matter if after A1's elbow contacts B1's face, the ball pops out of A1's hands, but B1 was still in a great deal of pain?

4) Does it matter if A1 was moving his elbows in an arc more than his pivot, and was judged to be excessively swinging his elbows, but B1 was still moving toward A1 when contact occurred?