Establishing confidence, confidence and respect from coaches and players

Originally Posted by gslefeb

What happens if A1 - deep in the corner - throws a full court Baseball pass to A2, during the pass B1 fouls A1; do you wait the two / three seconds to see if A2 can retrieve the pass? or do you call the foul?

Absolutely not! Why?
Because if A2 catches the baseball pass for the wide open dunk, why would you want to stop that play with a whistle?

Originally Posted by gslefeb

Snaqwells - A1 goes in for a layup - everyone in the building sees B1 hit A1 after the release of the ball. (by saying everyone sees this - I refer to the physical nature of the contact - it helps to describe the amount of the contact). But A1 shot is not altered, he is not put at a disadvantage. Are you saying you do not call this a foul?

Is A1s shot affected? If no... no call.
Is A1s landing affected? If no... no call.

Mere contact does not constitute a foul. When 10 players are moving in an enclosed area, contact is sure to happen. Any idiot could view or God forbid, HEAR contact & blow the whistle. The exceptional officials have a feel for the game & know when to & when not to blow the whistle.

The ideal games for an official to be on are the flowing, up & down, athletic contests. We should do our part in making good decisions to ensure that happens. Think BIG PICTURE... Don't be a GI

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

Absolutely not! Why? Because if A2 catches the baseball pass for the wide open dunk, why would you want to stop that play with a whistle?

Uh....because a foul occurred and it's our job to call those? Hey, just a thought. BTW - Notice he said a "foul" occurred, not just "contact".

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Just because someone is hit on the head alone does not mean there was illegal contact. Unless you can show me or anyone where the rules say otherwise, this is not necessarily true. And that is the point that many here have tried to convey to you in this case. What if that hit took place with the defender in their vertical space and maintained legal guarding position? You cannot just simply say that there is an obvious foul just because someone is hit without other information being shared IMHO.



The disadvantage might be because the shooter was not able to land properly or where they were supposed to. This has nothing to do with just the shot being altered and I really did not read Snaq or anyone suggest the two things were mutually exclusive. And if there is contact with an airborne shooter and the shot is not altered in any way, the shooter lands normally, then I probably do not have a foul. Of course I would have to see the play to make that final determination, but it is not an "obvious" or "automatic" foul the way you described it. And honestly it does not matter if you disagree. The rules back this up completely and it is totally a judgment call. We will all be judged for our judgment calls on some level. And either way you call it someone might disagree with the nature of the call no matter what philosophy you ultimately use.




I also disagree with this statement as well. For one I did not see snaq or anyone dig their heals in the sand. I think the examples are generic at best and do not suggest anything obvious but a personal opinion. If that is all you are saying, then that is fine but that does not mean everyone here has to agree with it. Just like you do not agree, he is no more stubborn (for the complete lack of a better term) on this issue in my opinion than you have been.

Peace

I was actually comending him on holding his position. I was also jus stating that the subject has become a stalemate and any further debate would prove pointless. I'm not saying he's right, I'm not saying I'm right although I would like to believe I am. Haha

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Uh....because a foul occurred and it's our job to call those? Hey, just a thought. BTW - Notice he said a "foul" occurred, not just "contact".

Oh really? I didn't see that & still don't see where he said that. Below in bold is what I was refering to. Sorry, but I dont see myself calling a foul in this situation & I would hope you wouldn't either as contact may be severe & still not a foul in this instance.

Originally Posted by gslefeb

A hard smack on the forearm of A1 by B1 will not be called a foul - if the A1 is able to pass the ball to A2?
What happens if A1 - deep in the corner - throws a full court Baseball pass to A2, during the pass B1 fouls A1; do you wait the two / three seconds to see if A2 can retrieve the pass? or do you call the foul?

[gslefeb]

Ch1twn - you missed answering the second part of my question. Each time B1 fouls A1 during the pass. The ball travels the same distance, the only change in the play is where A2 and B2 are during the pass. Therefore the contact is the same for each:

A. If A1's pass connects to A2; A2 goes in for a dunk. No problem with a no call.

B. If A1 passes to A2 - defense is back so no chance of a layup. Now do you call the foul?

C. If A1's pass does not make it to A2; Obviously, most of the time you can judge the pass not strong enough to reach A2 - therefore the foul can be called. But, what happens if the ball MAY have a chance to reach A2. Do you call a delayed foul - some two / three seconds after the foul occurred?


Another example:
If A1 is taking a jump shot - B1 contacts A1 on the elbow,

A. Ball goes in, No foul as the contact did not change the play?

B. Ball does not go in, foul is called as the foul has changed the play?



The Fouls I'm trying to discuss are the calls where there is illegal contact, but you - pass on them or call them - depending upon the outcome of the complete play. I trying to understand at what level of adv / disadv (based upon my examples) do you call the contact as a foul.

I'm not trying to argue if contact occurrs there should always be a whistle.

My question has always been: There is either a time constraint when the play is completed (hence my baseball pass example), OR there is the preceived advantage - does completing a pass nullify the foul? Or does the play need to offer a greater advantage to the offense (i.e. scoring opportunity) for a good no call.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by gslefeb

Each time B1 fouls A1 during the pass.

If that's true, then call the foul.

But, I suspect what you meant was "Each time B1 contacts A1 during the pass."

Your mis-use of the words reflects (but I won't posit on which is the casue and which is the effect) your bias.

[gslefeb]

Bob, yes.. I was trying to imply that the contact was great enough to warrent a foul..if all other factors hold.

I understand first there is contact, then there is judgement as to whether the contact is a foul, the judgement takes into account the adv / disadv, etc...I'm trying to discuss.

So yes, it should be B1 contacts A1, given what follows - would you call a foul?

Correct?

Originally Posted by gslefeb

Ch1twn - you missed answering the second part of my question. Each time B1 fouls A1 during the pass. The ball travels the same distance, the only change in the play is where A2 and B2 are during the pass. Therefore the contact is the same for each:

A. If A1's pass connects to A2; A2 goes in for a dunk. No problem with a no call.

- Great, but that's hard to do when you pop as soon as the contact on the passers arm occurs.

B. If A1 passes to A2 - defense is back so no chance of a layup. Now do you judge the conatact to be a foul?

- If A2 catches the pass I don't see how it can be a foul as the contact on A1 didn't affect the play.

C. If A1's pass does not make it to A2; Obviously, most of the time you can judge the pass not strong enough to reach A2 - therefore the foul can be called. But, what happens if the ball MAY have a chance to reach A2. Do you call a delayed foul - some two / three seconds after the foul occurred?

- Absolutely, we make decisions after the play has completed ie; SDF: start, develop, finish
To make a decision while the ball is still traveling to the intended receiver is not seeing the whole play. I have no problem with popping or explaining a late, correct whistle.

Another example:
If A1 is taking a jump shot - B1 contacts A1 on the elbow,

A. Ball goes in, No foul as the contact did not change the play?

- It all depends was the "contact" an incidental love tap while attempting to play the ball or did B1 purposely hit the elbow to affect the shot. What's the time & score? It may fall under the category of, right call but wrong time.

B. Ball does not go in, foul is called as the foul has changed the play?

- Same as above

The Fouls I'm trying to discuss are the calls where there is illegal contact, but you - pass on them or call them - depending upon the outcome of the complete play. I trying to understand at what level of adv / disadv (based upon my examples) do you call the contact as a foul.

I'm not trying to argue if contact occurrs there should always be a whistle.

My question has always been: There is either a time constraint when the play is completed (hence my baseball pass example), OR there is the preceived advantage - does completing a pass nullify the foul? Or does the play need to offer a greater advantage to the offense (i.e. scoring opportunity) for a good no call.

I cannot answer the rest of your post because of the words you use.
Illegal contact is a foul...
Marginal contact can be passed on...
But those decisions cannot be made until after seeing the whole play. Some contact may be marginal then upgraded to illegal (in the officials judgment) after the completion of the play. And vis-versa

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by gslefeb

Bob, yes.. I was trying to imply that the contact was great enough to warrent a foul..if all other factors hold.

And that "if all other factors hold" is ad/disad and/or judgment. So, it can't possibly be answered.

[JRutledge]

gslefeb,

The problem with your example is you assume that what we have been talking about here is passing on illegal contact. I do not recall that anyone said to pass on illegal contact. But to have illegal contact you must have some kind of disadvantage to the player being contacted. And the rules clearly express this position. I would never knowingly pass on illegal contact. I might pass on contact I deem incidental and that is comes with judgment and experience. And this is all that anyone here has really said. No one has advocated not calling a foul when necessarily. We just want to make sure that there is an actual foul.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by gslefeb

Ch1twn - you missed answering the second part of my question. Each time B1 fouls A1 during the pass. The ball travels the same distance, the only change in the play is where A2 and B2 are during the pass. Therefore the contact is the same for each:

A. If A1's pass connects to A2; A2 goes in for a dunk. No problem with a no call.

B. If A1 passes to A2 - defense is back so no chance of a layup. Now do you call the foul?

C. If A1's pass does not make it to A2; Obviously, most of the time you can judge the pass not strong enough to reach A2 - therefore the foul can be called. But, what happens if the ball MAY have a chance to reach A2. Do you call a delayed foul - some two / three seconds after the foul occurred?


Another example:
If A1 is taking a jump shot - B1 contacts A1 on the elbow,

A. Ball goes in, No foul as the contact did not change the play?

B. Ball does not go in, foul is called as the foul has changed the play?



The Fouls I'm trying to discuss are the calls where there is illegal contact, but you - pass on them or call them - depending upon the outcome of the complete play. I trying to understand at what level of adv / disadv (based upon my examples) do you call the contact as a foul.

I'm not trying to argue if contact occurrs there should always be a whistle.

My question has always been: There is either a time constraint when the play is completed (hence my baseball pass example), OR there is the preceived advantage - does completing a pass nullify the foul? Or does the play need to offer a greater advantage to the offense (i.e. scoring opportunity) for a good no call.

Ok, let me try this again. Apparently, I'm not being clear because this whole business of whether the shot goes in keeps coming up.

I don't care if the shot goes in or not; I don't recall whether or not I've evern blown my whistle on a shooting foul after the success of the shot was determined. I can say I've never used that to make my determination, especially on a jump shooter.

Again, for me, the determination of advantage comes with whether or not there was a noticeable impact on the shot. Was it significantly altered due to the contact for which the defender was responsible? If yes, foul. If not no foul. I've no-called incidental contact on missed shots, and I've called fouls on made shots; without regrets.

As Rut alluded to, the other factors are whether the landing is altered and whether we're looking to clean up rough play.

As for the passing scenarios. If A1 is intending to throw a pass to A2 at the top of the key to re-set the offense, and after the release A1's arm gets slapped by B1 it's very likely a no-call. This is where the whole "a foul is a foul" mantra serves only to confuse the situation. If the contact somehow impedes A1's movement, then a foul could be called. If it's early enough to affect the speed and/or trajectory of the pass, a foul could be called. Sometimes, the answer to these questions isn't so easy, so experience comes into play.

Just like I don't care whether the shot goes in, I really don't care whether the pass actually results in a layup or the re-setting of the offense. It's about whether or not the pass or shot is attempted or completed as I judge it was intended to be attempted.

It's easier just to call a foul when the whole gym hears the slap; but it's not necessarily the right call even if it's the expected call.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

I was actually comending him on holding his position. I was also jus stating that the subject has become a stalemate and any further debate would prove pointless. I'm not saying he's right, I'm not saying I'm right although I would like to believe I am. Haha

FWIW, I'm not convinced we'd call it too differently out on the court. I think the number of plays that I would let go and you'd call would be very minimal.

[gslefeb]

Snaqwells - thanks for the attempts..How's this:

Contact occurs - in order to be considered illegal:

A. Rules are applied: LGP, Verticality, Blind Screens, illegal use of hands...etc
B. Judgement is applied: Was the contact incidental, affect on the play?, Advantage / Disadvantage?

If A is true the official applies the judgement in part B. While applying the judgement it is important for the official to see the complete play. If part B also indicates the contact is illegal, a foul has occurred.

My attempts (regardless of how poorly worded) only were to try to get a better understanding of part B.