Incidental contact ?

[Pirate]

Witnessed a situation recently (I was not officiating) where an official let a play continue without a whistle and was wondering how you guys/gals would call the same play?

A1 is dribbling down court, B1 comes up from behind A1 and "accidentally" steps on A1's foot causing A1 to go down and lose possession. Official let it go claiming incidental contact and thus shouldn't be called a foul. I personally see it as an advantage/disadvantage sitch and would have called the foul. Who is right?

[grunewar]

While you HTBT to see it, if it happened as you do described, most times I would call the foul, usually use the "push" signal, put the ball in play, and move out. Wish there was a "trip" foul, but, there's not....as has been discussed before.

Bottom line for me, if you have a real crash, player goes down, advantage defense due to contact, better to call something than let it go.

[JRutledge]

If you are saying that B1 who was not in a legal position comes from behind and steps on and makes contact with a ball handler, that sounds like a foul to me. Now maybe if there is a loose ball or a rebounding situation you might have to see this because I could make a case that players were in a similar advantageous situation, but not when it comes to the ball carrier.

Peace

[BillyMac]

There's a difference between being tripped, and tripping. (foul, no foul)
Accidental isn't always incidental. (contact)

[Pirate]

There's a difference between being tripped, and tripping. (foul, no foul)

Although I've been a member since '99, I consider myself "new" to the board again since I haven't been on here sinc '03. So, could you please enlighten me on the above statement please?

[justacoach]

Originally Posted by Pirate

Although I've been a member since '99, I consider myself "new" to the board again since I haven't been on here sinc '03. So, could you please enlighten me on the above statement please?

Welcome back, you are about to get schooled by the inimitable BillyMac, and you will like it..

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

There's a difference between being tripped, and tripping. (foul, no foul)

An obvious difference is that "being tripped" happens to the "trippee," and "tripping" is generally called on the "tripper." But that's not what BillyMac means.

The point is that players can trip over their own feet, which is obviously not a foul. They can also trip over defenders who have not moved or are otherwise not responsible for the contact, and that tripping is also not a foul.

Only when a player is responsible for the contact in such a way that the result is another player tripping do we have a foul (and possibly not even then).

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Only when a player is responsible for the contact in such a way that the result is another player tripping do we have a foul (and possibly not even then).

So in the OP, would you have called the foul in that sitch? A1 was dribbling downcourt and B1 comes up from behind (obviously not a legal guarding position) and "accidentally", not intentionally, trips (steps on the foot of A1) causing A1 to lose possession. I personally have a foul there, but I'm just wondering what other officials are thinking there.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by mbyron

The point is that players can trip over their own feet, which is obviously not a foul. They can also trip over defenders who have not moved or are otherwise not responsible for the contact, and that tripping is also not a foul. Only when a player is responsible for the contact in such a way that the result is another player tripping do we have a foul (and possibly not even then).

I could not have said it better myself. Seriously. I couldn't. Well done.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Pirate

Witnessed a situation recently (I was not officiating) where an official let a play continue without a whistle and was wondering how you guys/gals would call the same play?

A1 is dribbling down court, B1 comes up from behind A1 and "accidentally" steps on A1's foot causing A1 to go down and lose possession. Official let it go claiming incidental contact and thus shouldn't be called a foul. I personally see it as an advantage/disadvantage sitch and would have called the foul. Who is right?

Sounds like this guy doesn't know the definition of "incidental."

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Sounds like this guy doesn't know the definition of "incidental."

Incidental contact is contact with an opponent which is permitted and which does not constitute a foul.
ART. 1 The mere fact that contact occurs does not constitute a foul. When 10 players are moving rapidly in a limited area, some contact is certain to occur.
ART. 2 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.
ART. 4 A player who is screened within his/her visual field is expected to avoid contact with the screener by stopping or going around the screener. In cases of screens outside the visual field, the opponent may make inadvertent contact with the screener, and such contact is to be ruled incidental contact, provided the screener is not displaced if he/she has the ball.
ART. 5 If, however, a player approaches an opponent from behind or from a position from which he/she has no reasonable chance to play the ball without making contact with the opponent, the responsibility is on the player in the unfavorable position.

[Nevadaref]

Last season the NCAA stated that this was one of two "absolutes" when a foul must be called.
Do a search and read some of the posts on that concept. That should help clarify this situation for you.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Last season the NCAA stated that this was one of two "absolutes" when a foul must be called.
Do a search and read some of the posts on that concept. That should help clarify this situation for you.

1. Two hands on the dribbler is a foul.
   
2. If the dribbler falls down or loses control of the ball, it is a foul (if the defender bumps or illegally contacts the dribbler).

They are on the NCAA Tape last year. I do not know if you can easily find this information anymore without registering for the new website.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Absolutes when a foul must be called.

Ball-Handler / Hand-Checking
Places both hands on a ball-handler, it is a foul.
Continuously places a hand on the ball-handler, it is a foul.
Continuously jabs a hand or forearm on a ball-handler, it is a foul.
Remember RSBQ. If the dribbler’s Rhythm, Speed, Balance, or Quickness are affected, we should have a hand-checking foul.

Post Play
Let’s not allow a defender to use a leg or knee to move a player off the block.
Let’s make sure the offensive player isn’t holding off the defender, or holding him with his off-hand.
As Lead, let’s find the post matchup as soon as possible so that we get the first foul.
Remember RIDD. Don’t let players Redirect, Impede, Displace, or Dislodge.

Intentional Fouls
Let’s make sure there is a play on the ball by the defense. If there’s no play on the ball, if the defense grabs the jersey, or pushes from behind, or bear hugs the offensive player, we should consider an intentional foul. These are not basketball plays and should be penalized as intentional.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Incidental contact is contact with an opponent which is permitted and which does not constitute a foul.

blah blah blah

yadda yadda yadda

ART. 5 If, however, a player approaches an opponent from behind or from a position from which he/she has no reasonable chance to play the ball without making contact with the opponent, the responsibility is on the player in the unfavorable position.

Bingo. From behind. No chance to play the ball. Unfavorable position. All the fixins for non-incidental contact.

This also falls under rule 11-1, "Call the obvious."