That went in???

[WreckRef]

Originally Posted by WreckRef

Ok, I had the strangest foul the other night in a men's league game.

A1 shoots the ball, A2 goes to tap the rebound into the basket from about 8 feet. While he's attempting the try, B2 smacks A2 on the arm so hard it forces his arm forward and actually helps him (yes, helps him) in making the basket from about 8 feet away from the rim.

I call the foul, see the ball go in (in complete disbelief because it was a line drive, think Clyde Drexler), report the foul and when I say, "Count the basket" everybody looks at me (with a WTF look) because nobody realized it went in other than me.

Just wondering if anybody else has had strange/odd baskets where the defender helped the offense to score.

Nevada, I think you misread my OP. If not and you are still convinced I shouldn't have counted the basket or awarded FT's I am interested to see why. Not trying to be a smart @ss, just trying to understand what you are saying. Or maybe I should have explained it a little better by saying that as soon as the ball is touched by A2 he gets hit from behind by B2.

[26 Year Gap]

Back in the old days, a tap was not considered a try.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by WreckRef

Nevada, I think you misread my OP. If not and you are still convinced I shouldn't have counted the basket or awarded FT's I am interested to see why. Not trying to be a smart @ss, just trying to understand what you are saying. Or maybe I should have explained it a little better by saying that as soon as the ball is touched by A2 he gets hit from behind by B2.

I took your OP to mean that the player went for the ball, but had not yet contacted it with his tapping motion when the defender fouled him and that forced his arm forward and into the ball. As I noted above, that foul occurs PRIOR to the act of shooting and the goal cannot be counted nor can FTs be awarded, other than for the bonus.
However, if the tapper had already reached the ball and made contact with it, then you handled it correctly.
Either you need to convey your meaning better in written words or I need to decipher it better when reading them.
Anyway, I hope that my prior post was helpful and instructive should such a situation arise in one of your games.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Sounds to me like the defender was contacting the tapper's arm while the tapper was touching the ball....good call. Even if the contact began before the tapper touched the ball, I'd still call it a shooting foul if the contact was still in progress when the tapper made contact with the ball....the initial contact doesn't have to be the actual point of the foul.

1. It didn't sound that way to me, but that may have been the case.

2. I have to disagree. Trying to do it that way can only lead to trouble. Keep it simple and go with the start of the contact. Don't give the would be tapper FTs that he doesn't deserve by rule.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I took your OP to mean that the player went for the ball, but had not yet contacted it with his tapping motion when the defender fouled him and that forced his arm forward and into the ball. As I noted above, that foul occurs PRIOR to the act of shooting and the goal cannot be counted nor can FTs be awarded, other than for the bonus.
However, if the tapper had already reached the ball and made contact with it, then you handled it correctly.
Either you need to convey your meaning better in written words or I need to decipher it better when reading them.
Anyway, I hope that my prior post was helpful and instructive should such a situation arise in one of your games.



1. It didn't sound that way to me, but that may have been the case.

2. I have to disagree. Trying to do it that way can only lead to trouble. Keep it simple and go with the start of the contact. Don't give the would be tapper FTs that he doesn't deserve by rule.

2. If contact prior to the tap is incidental, why call it? Only when the ball is also contact with A1 does B1's contact become a problem during the tap. I'm with Camron: shooting foul.

It's just like when Illegal Contact gets upgraded to Pass Interference because the ball has been thrown. Remember Terry Porter?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

I'm with Camron: shooting foul.

But the rules aren't with either of you.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

But the rules aren't with either of you.

You're saying that if the play in question is a foul, the foul will always be at the instant the contact first occurs?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

But the rules aren't with either of you.

Really? Are you saying that contact that is occuring when the tapper is touching the ball isn't a foul???? Or are you saying that contact that occurs before the tapper touches the ball can't be incidental??? Show me those rules! (I'm not holding my breath).