Easy question for the seasoned guys.

[bbcof83]

Originally Posted by TheOracle

A defender reacting to a pump fake very, very rarely jumps straight up and stays vertical. Defenders falling for a pump fake got beat. The offensive player made a move and got an advantage. Barring a completely blatant shoulder lead through the defender's torso, knocking him backwards, I could not even fathom a credible PC foul in this scenario.

Just being a devil's advocate here because I agree with the Oracle...

Say the defender is jumping forward toward the shooter, thus contact is his fault, but the offensive player also gives a completely blatant shoulder to the torso of the defender. Who is the foul on? Can't be PC because the defender isn't legal. Can we have a double foul? Both players have committed a foul at the exact same time.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by bbcof83

Can't be PC because the defender isn't legal.

I don't think that's the rule. Being legal just gives the defender "extra" movement. Just because the defender isn't legal doesn't me he can't be fouled.

I'd judge whether the defender's "forward jump" would have caused contact if the offensive player had not also moved forward. If so, I'd likely have a foul on the defense. If the defender would not have made contact, then the offense must give him room to come down. So, it's either a PC foul or a no-call (if no advantage was gained -- and I'd say that's the case in most "real life" plays where the offense moves forward).

[gslefeb]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I'd judge whether the defender's "forward jump" would have caused contact if the offensive player had not also moved forward. If so, I'd likely have a foul on the defense. If the defender would not have made contact, then the offense must give him room to come down. So, it's either a PC foul or a no-call (if no advantage was gained -- and I'd say that's the case in most "real life" plays where the offense moves forward).

I thought:
A ball handler or shooter does not have to "give him room to come down". But a player without the ball can not move under and occupy the landing space of an airborne player (must provide a place to land)

Am I wrong?

In the OP question - No foul on defense, probably no call on A1 unless he under cuts the airborne B1.

In the next example - depends on how much B1 moves forward - if slightly same as above, if more then if contact foul on B1.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by gslefeb

I thought:
A ball handler or shooter does not have to "give him room to come down". But a player without the ball can not move under and occupy the landing space of an airborne player (must provide a place to land)

Am I wrong?

In the OP question - No foul on defense, probably no call on A1 unless he under cuts the airborne B1.

In the next example - depends on how much B1 moves forward - if slightly same as above, if more then if contact foul on B1.

I know of no exception that allows a player with the ball to move into the path of an airborne player.

[gslefeb]

If the Airborne playing does not have LGP; then they are responsible for the contact.

A1 with ball is stationary - B1 comes from the side and Jumps to get in front of A1. A1 dribbles forward and contacts B1 who is still in air. This is a foul on B1 as B1 never had LGP, even though A1 did not give him a place to land.

If B1 has LGP; and they jump forward into the path - I believe B1 is responsible for the contact as a defender can not move forward into the path of A1, they can get to the space first but not move into A1.

Generally, you see this play as a defender comes flying to block a shot. A1 pulls the ball down and dribble drives, moving into the landing space of B1. B1 lands on A1, 100% of the time this is called on B1.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by gslefeb

If the Airborne playing does not have LGP; then they are responsible for the contact.

A1 with ball is stationary - B1 comes from the side and Jumps to get in front of A1. A1 dribbles forward and contacts B1 who is still in air. This is a foul on B1 as B1 never had LGP, even though A1 did not give him a place to land.

Do you have a rule or case reference on this?

What about 4-45-7, which states: "The player with the ball is to be given no more protection or consideration than the defender in judging which player has violated the rules"? So, if a player with the ball moves under an airborne defender, how is that different than the defender moving under an airborne shooter?

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Do you have a rule or case reference on this?

What about 4-45-7, which states: "The player with the ball is to be given no more protection or consideration than the defender in judging which player has violated the rules"? So, if a player with the ball moves under an airborne defender, how is that different than the defender moving under an airborne shooter?

One has the ball, the other one doesn't