ok folks here i go again.

a1 drives the lane picks up dribble takes 2 steps, jumps and has the ball at his midsection. b1 steps toward a1 with his hands high to defend, jumps and causes the ball to become "sandwitched"(for lack of better word) between the 2 players making a1 unable to finish. they then both come to the ground.

what would you call on this play?

foul for sure
 

Now, it sounds like a block to me, only because B1's hands are high above his head. And if the order stated is accurate, you can't go jump ball since A1 left the ground before B1.

The only way I could see it as incidental contact is if A1 leaps so far towards the hoop and B1 barely moves forward in his jump.

Block.
b1 moving toward a1, who is in the air.
mick

Block? Where is the contact?
 

If it happens the way it was written, sounds like traveling when A1 comes back down. I don't see how you can have a block since b1 is not contacting A1, only the ball. Second choice would be a jump ball, but by rule it says hands on the ball.

I believe I would have to go with traveling.

Yuck.

I don't see much other than travelling. Can't be a block, as Self describes, because there isn't any contact - other than on the ball (not a foul). B1 didn't get hands on the ball, so it can't be a jump. Other than that, A1 went up with the ball and came down with the ball. I'd call travel, and expect to take some heat.

SOunds like one you have to see.

Did A1 release the ball or was he holding it the entire time?

Was there contact created by B1 on the play?

The way I read it, you have a blocking foul on B1. B1 after A1 was in the air moved into his space. A1 is airborne, and IMO has started his movement towards the basket so you have a 2 shot penalty. Arms/hands have nothing to do with it. I can’t remember how many times I have had to tell kids that just because your arms are up you do not have license to make/cause contact.

As far as traveling, there is no way that I can see that as a call. If you were to disregard the above the fact is that the ball was stopped by the action of B1 and you would have a jump ball. (But you can not disregard the moving into A1 space and that the shot movement has started.)

I don't see where it says there was no contact on the play. I don't see how there can be no contact on this play - A1 moving to the basket & B1 stepping in to defend. Block.

Rec Ref Again where is the contact?
 

B1 never touched A1, how can you have a foul?B1 only touched the ball.

Second to have a jump ball B1 has to block the ball with his hands per rule 4-25-2. The only contact was the body to the ball.

This is a traveling violation.....

I don't understand what you mean. The play as it reads says the only contact was on the ball. So if that is the only contact on the ball, per rule 4-19-1 there was no contact on the opponent so it cannot be a personal foul.

Well, here's the play:

a1 drives the lane picks up dribble takes 2 steps, jumps and has the ball at his midsection. b1 steps toward
a1 with his hands high to defend, jumps and causes the ball to become "sandwitched"(for lack of better
word) between the 2 players making a1 unable to finish. they then both come to the ground.

Maybe you can tell me where it says there's no contact except on the ball? I can't see it, so I'm assuming there will be "contact on the opponent". In fact, I'm saying in this case there is almost always contact, so I'm going with the block.

Well, whatever you call (or no-call) on this play, you're going to have some 'splanin to do Lucy!!!! :D

A jump ball may be the easiest call to sell here even though, by rule, it is not the correct call.

I would venture to say that a majority of officials, given this play in a game situation, would call a jump ball if there was no contact other than B1 on the ball with his body.

I'm going with a block on this one! Unless the coach has an angle that he can clearly see that only the ball was contacted by b1, it is not going to be hard to sell!

AK ref SE

While the case was presented with some ambiguity, I believe the intent was that there was no contact. He said that he ball was "sandwiched" between the players. I interpreted that to mean the bodies didn't contact each other...the presence of the ball prevented any contact.

I have traveling.

You're going to make a call based on what the coach expects and can see??? Bet you could sell that "over-the-back" call too but that doesn't make it right.

OK, since maybe we are reading things into this I'll offer another option. Webster defines a step as "the single complete movement of raising one foot and putting it down in another spot, as in walking". If, after A1 picked up his dribble, he lifts one foot off the floor (say left foot)and puts it in another spot, then his right foot becomes the pivot foot. If he thin lifts his right foot and returns it to the floor before he releases the ball isn't that traveling? Just a thought.

Nope. The play doesn't say where either foot was when the dribble ended. If neither foot is touching, then the frist step establishes the pivot and the second step is legal. We see this play all the time.

The intent of the play is to ask about the contact/block/noncontact scenario. The first part of the play seems legal enough.

I don't see how a 29.5" diameter elastic sphere can prevent
two 150+ lb (more likely 200+ lbs) humans from contacting
each other when they are moving towards each other, one of
them presumably at a reasonably rapid rate. If B1 is legal I
have a travel. Otherwise it's a block.

a1 does not release the ball he remained in possession.

contact is very minimal and does not illegally impede the progress of the offense.

I don't see how a 29.5" diameter elastic sphere can prevent
two 150+ lb (more likely 200+ lbs) humans from contacting
each other when they are moving towards each other, one of
them presumably at a reasonably rapid rate. If B1 is legal I
have a travel. Otherwise it's a block. [/B][/QUOTE]Elastic?:confused: Your balls must be different than mine.Mine won't stretch!:D

Presuming "all ball",I can't see a foul on B1.If B1 stops A1 from getting the shot off and A1 comes back down with the ball,I'd call it a jump ball.Why?This specific circumstance is not spelled out in the rules,and the situation is fairly similar to a player blocking a shot with his hand(s).If you got something close in the rulebook to CYA,then use it to CYA!

Crew just added his explanation after I posted,so I'll offer an amendment.If the contact is "all ball" and very minimal,I'd go with a travel.Same reasoning-close to language already in the book.



[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Aug 19th, 2002 at 12:44 PM]

Yeah, my balls are special. :)

Anyway, what Crew added was B1 does not illegally impede A1, which is different from the way I read the play. If B1 steps into A1 driving the lane he has illegally impeded him. As I already said if B1 is legal I have a travel on A1, which I guess answers Crew's question since I think he's saying you have already judged B1 legal and have to decide between jump ball & travel.

With minimal contact,I can agree with that.I think that it's the same concept as a legal block with the hands i.e. minimal contact vs. sufficient contact that the shooter can't do anything with the ball.

Btw,I won't get into the concept of balls,Woody,and spoiling your dog.I think that one's already been covered.:D

LOL. BTW, a Woody & his balls are soon to be parted.
(They were almost parted yesterday, he had an accident on the rug & it took me 10 minutes to get the scissors out of my wife's hands. :) )

Cameron Rust-
Your right Cameron, I also call the reach, and I make the travelling signal on an out of bounds throw-in situation!!

My point earlier was ( I do not make a call based on what the coach wants) That.....it is going to very difficult to see that there was only contact on the ball between the two players.

I am going to stay with a block

AK ref SE

What if you do see it?
 

The question as written or as the clarifiaction says the only contact you see is the ball against the players. Are you still calling a block, even if you see no contact clearly?

What
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dan_ref

Quote:

[i]Originally posted by Jurassic Referee If B1 steps into A1 driving the lane he has illegally impeded him.

What rule book is this in, I haven't seen it. If B1 steps infront of A1 and illegally impedes him by saying boo and their is no contact, you have a block?

You can impede someone all night long as long as their is no contact. Ball to body is not contact.....

[Edited by Self on Aug 19th, 2002 at 02:05 PM]

Re: What
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Self

Quote:

Originally posted by Dan_ref Quote: [i]Originally posted by Jurassic Referee If B1 steps into A1 driving the lane he has illegally impeded him. What rule book is this in, I haven't seen it. If B1 steps infront of A1 and illegally impedes him by saying boo and their is no contact, you have a block? You can impede someone all night long as long as their is no contact. Ball to body is not contact..... [Edited by Self on Aug 19th, 2002 at 02:05 PM]

Self,you're misreading Dan's post.He said that the illegal contact is physical contact by B1 on A1 while B1 is trying to block the shot.That is a foul.Dan said that if B1 got "ball only" with minimal contact on the ball,he had travelling.I agree with that.

LOL. BTW, a Woody & his balls are soon to be parted.
(They were almost parted yesterday, he had an accident on the rug & it took me 10 minutes to get the scissors out of my wife's hands. :) )
[/B][/QUOTE]I just sent Woody an e-mail.Just basically told him "fairs fair"!Best sleep on your stomach to-night.:eek:

basically, i was looking for some philosophy on this play. the rule book clearly states that "hands firmly on the ball..."(nc2a and nba) constitutes a held ball. that is why i made sure to say the body created the situation. getting into the defense a litle deeper no foul(my judgment) was committed on the play i saw.

my gut feeling on this play is a held ball and that is what i called without grief from anyone(thank goodness). but when i read the held ball definition i began to 2nd guess myself. then i thought, what if he were to stop the shot with his forarm or elbow and they both came to the floor. i would rule that a held ball as well without doubt.

if anyone were to call a travel in this sitch it is also an appropriate decision-i just wanted to hear from the board.

any additional thoughts/philosophy?

Hi guys. I'm a rookie here, so take it easy on me.

When I first read this I thought if I saw this play full speed I'm thinking I would have let it go as if the offensive player were stripped of the ball. There's virtually no contact, so there is no foul. You can't rule it a block and there is no tie up situation. I have a hard time calling traveling when both players were in contact with the ball (it was sandwiched between them). You could argue it was dislodged. I think a "let the kids play" would be in order based on the premise that two guys were hustling for the ball.

Re: What
 

I dont know how much clearer I can be. If B1 has not
established legal guarding position and/or moves into and
causes contact with a driving A1 then B1 is responsible for
this illegal contact. In this case I have a foul on B1.
If B1 is legal then in this play I have a travel when A1
comes down with the ball. This is what I've been saying all thread.

I can't make it much simpler than that, if you want to get
into a p1ssing contest over this then you'll have to do it by yourself.

Sorry to weigh in so late - just saw this today. I got a travel on this one. That brief sandwich isn't a held ball, and there is no illegal contact. Just a case of A leaving his feet, running out of space to operate, and coming back down again.

I will also say that my immediate reaction was held ball. Then I reflected on the case where A can jump, B can touch ball, and A come back down for a travel and overruled myself! So I can easily see you calling it a held ball in a game situation. And obviously, some would agree with that call anyway.

For those of you crying "Foul!"
 

Let's try and look at it this way:

A1 is standing still, B1 closely guarding, and A1 (while standing) pushes the ball forward into B1, who may or may not be moving towards A1. Is this a foul on B1 because s/he touched the ball? How 'bout if A1 repeats the above, but B1, being much much bigger and stronger, doens't move but instead A1 goes backwards. Is this a fould on B1? Do your answers change if A1 and/or B1 are in the air?

I think those of us chanting travel (or jump ball for that matter - anything but a foul on B1) are wondering how there can be a foul on B1 when all s/he has touched was the ball?

Coach, as Dan_ref said above, the key to all of this is that A1 is airborne. If B1 moves into A1 or into A1 landing spot after he is in the air it can not be anything but a block.

No pissing contest
 

Actually if you read your posts I think you will find your not as clear as you think you are. Just a matter of opinion though.

I read a question for what is written and don't read more than the question. Many of your posts were assuming more than what was just asked.

To me it is simple: Just answer the question given and don't read into it.....

RecRef?
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RecRef

Quote:

Originally posted by Hawks Coach Coach, as Dan_ref said above, the key to all of this is that A1 is airborne. If B1 moves into A1 or into A1 landing spot after he is in the air it can not be anything but a block.

Rec Ref, Where are you getting this. Again two players jump the ONLY CONTACT IS BALL TO BODY. You are calling a foul. Am I reading this correctly?

If it is ball to body rather than body to body, or at least body to body is minimal at best (as crew states in a follow-up post), there is no illegal contact, therefore no foul. I am not replying to all of the hypotheticals about illegal contact, just to crew's case as he states it.

I understand the airborne shooter principle - but this only applies if there is illegal contact. A does not have a landing spot until he lands. Since he didn't land on B, B wasn't in A's landing spot. Had A tucked the ball and crashed into B, he may have drawn a foul. But A let the ball hit B then lost control of body in air. There is no foul here, just a choice between a held ball and a travel. And I go with travel for the reasons I cited.

Come on, Coach. You don't really expect us to go with you on that one, do you? ;) A does not have to land on B in order to be denied his "landing spot". If a defender jumps into your point guard's airborne path as he's shooting a lay-up and they collide, your point guard going one way and the defender going another, would you not expect a foul to be called? I expect you might. :)

Chuck

As crew posted above,A1 did not release the ball.He wasn't stripped and the ball wasn't dislodged.A1 went up in the air with player control of the ball,and when he landed he still had player control of the ball(and never lost player control of the ball).With no body contact=no foul,the only calls you could make are travelling or a jump ball-and you gotta call one of them.A no-call isn't really an option in this case.
Btw,welcome to the board.

Not a Foul
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ChuckElias

Quote:

Originally posted by Hawks Coach If a defender jumps into your point guard's airborne path as he's shooting a lay-up and they collide, your point guard going one way and the defender going another, would you not expect a foul to be called? I expect you might. :)Chuck

Only if ther is PLAYER contact. Coach is referring to player and ball contact. That is NOT a foul. Traveling or possibly a held ball. BUY, not a foul.

Chuck
Big IF in that sentence. I would agree, if the case you cited occurred. Clearly contact, clearly a foul, regardless of whether or not you call an airborne A colliding with B on the way down "A landing on B." I was merely responding to RECREF's way of saying it - and landing on, colliding with, making contact (beyond incidental) with B all have the same result when B moves into A's path after A leaves feet - Block on B.

However, A did not collide with B in crew's case, just the ball in A's hands. No foul in my book, regardless of whether or not A might have landed where B was if the ball hadn't contacted B. That is all I was saying.

I would be great if we could have some streamed in videos....like YOU MAKE THE CALL.....then there is no assuming or reading into......because I assume when you try to picture what actually happened....just like opinions we all picture it a little different.
I hope basketball season gets here soon!!!

AK ref SE

[Edited by AK ref SE on Aug 19th, 2002 at 04:21 PM]

I should also add that if I am A's coach, we have a clear blocking foul (and a shooting foul at that :) ), and if I am B's coach, it is most certainly a travel. These calls are really quite easy, you know ;)

Hawks coach-

It looks like your easy to please 50% of the time!

AK ref SE

Yeah, but the other team always seems to get 60-70% of the calls, you know.

dan-ref, and rec-ref,
assuming there is no foul on the play what would you suggest, a held ball or travel? which call do you think best fits the rules and the game?(besides a block)

Good one, Coach!

Wow!!! You must ref some really low scoring games (zero-zero). That is one huge ball. At a 29.5" diameter, how does it fit through the rim that is about 18" in diameter? ;)

Good catch,Camron.Sb circumference.In his defense,Dan is noted for his large balls when he referees.:D

Let's suppose that you are on a committee to write the first ever Basketball Rules Book. After the first draft. someone recognizes that you need a definition for "held ball."

So, you think of the way the game is played, and how you want it called, and come up with the "two players have hands so firmly on the ball it can't be controlled without undue roughness / B's hands on the ball prevent A from releasing the ball on the try" wording.

Everyone agrees with the definition because that's what happens 99.99% of the time -- no one thinks of the rare exception (well, no one except Crew ;) )

I think the *intent* is there -- contact with the ball by B prevented A's release -- that's a held ball.

As someone on another board once said, "The rules book is a set of finite rules to apply to infinite circumstances." If the book had to cover all the circumstances, it would be as large as the Tax Code -- and just as hard to apply.

i like.

Re: No pissing contest
 

Let's kick this dead horse one more time. If you go back to the original post, before Crew's clarification, you'll see that there is absolutely nothing about contact. Minimal, none or otherwise.


ok folks here i go again.

a1 drives the lane picks up dribble takes 2 steps, jumps and has the ball at his midsection. b1 steps toward
a1 with his hands high to defend, jumps and causes the ball to become "sandwitched"(for lack of better
word) between the 2 players making a1 unable to finish. they then both come to the ground.

So your claim that there was no contact is just as much "reading into the play" as my claim there was contact. In fact, I still say that 95 out of 100 times there will be contact on this sort of play - the ball rarely absorbs the contact. I don't know what your experience is but that is mine. Which is why I said block until Crew made his clarification.

Well, I already said my balls are special, and now you know why! (Diameter? Doh!) :)

I read Bob's post, and I like it except I'm a bit more literal with respect to a held ball, I guess. If I was to put it into words I need to see some proactive move by B1 to call a held ball, which I suppose always means he's gotta get a hand on the ball (and this is supported by the wording in the rules, but as I said I buy Bob's argument that the rules can't cover everything). In addition, since B1 was able to get into A1's path legally he should be rewarded, but that is secondary, IMO.

My reason for switching from held ball to travel was same as Dan's - B has done nothing to hold the ball. A ran out of space, couldn't shoot, and now is coming down with ball in hand. Put another way, A putting ball into B, rather than B blocking shot attempt, caused A not to be able to release the ball. Good defense, travel.

But I can clearly see either call being made, and a reasonable case for either.

Unless we "ASSUME" something that is not discribed, we have a blocked shot.

1 more thing
Dan Ref said that 95% of the time there will be contact. This means someone is anticipating the foul. When we call what we think happened, we get a lot of calls wrong. If we have a patient whistle, we can call what actually happened, and get the call right. Sometimes what actually happened is nothing. But what do I know. I live in Ark.

What's worse, the thread about Dan's balls or the thread about Jesse and Jesse? :D

C'mon now, Todd. You should know that somebody already has a claim to the line "But what the hell do I know?" :) You know, like Pat Riley has the copyright on "threepeat". You might have to pay a royalty if you're going to start questioning what you know. :D

It would be like sending Tony $5 for a question about catching your own airball. Only you'd have to send it to Chicago. ;)

Chuck

That's a low blow, Chuck. But then again, I heard you were good a low blows! :p

Yes, but we can anticipate the play.

Dan's spreading lies again. Just wait till I see him on Saturday!! :mad:

Chuck ;)

I'll be the guy in the George Steinbrenner outfit :eek:

It seems you might agree with what I said but you have a problem with believing I might be blowing the whistle too soon. I can live with that...

this was posted on hoopsref.com website by nba official Joe Forte.
May i comment on a particular play which involves the player who has the ball trapped by the defender. I believe this is Crews play.if an offensive player has his attempt stopped by the hand and or body of the defender it shall be a jumpball.think of the play in these terms.the offensive player makes a move to the basket in an attempt to shoot the ball.If the defender puts his hand on the ball or body without the ball being dislodged from the offensive player this act would be deemed to be a jumpball.Because the defender stopped the action of the offensive player why would it ever be a travel.How can you penalize the offensive player if the defender stopped his movement.?? Allow me to explain : if the offensive player goes up for a shot and the defender places his hand on the ball with the offensive player returning to the floor this is a jumpball.The defender does not have to return to the floor with the offensive player.Just touching the ball and releasing is good enough for the jumpball rule. Now if the offensive player goes up for a shot and the defender knocks the ball away meaning dislodges from the offensive player the offensive player can return to the floor and do whatever he wishes to do. Why because the ball was dislodged. Good to speaking with you guys as we say in the City.

The above may be true for the NBA.It is NOT true for the NCAA and NFHS rulesets.Merely touching the ball does not automatically make it a jump ball.The official has to judge whether the defensive player held the ball firmly enough so that the offensive player couldn't do anything with it.If this is his judgement,then you have a jump ball if the offensive player comes back down with the ball.If the official judges that the ball was just touched,you have a travel if the ball doesn't leave the offensive player's hands and he comes down with it.
A good reference is the NFHS casebook play 4.43.3A(c).That spells it out.
Personally,I like the NBA definition.It takes the judgement out of the call and makes it clear-cut.

actually the nba specific ruling is 99% similar to the fed and nc2a.

nba-a held ball occurs when 2 opponents have one or both hands so firmly on the ball that neither can gain sole possession without undue roughness.

i think that this play is a "feel for the game" play, and the philosophy is different at each level. this is definately not a black and white play and definately requires some thought. for example a defender prevents the release of the ball by out jumping the offensive player and blocking the ball with his elbow or bicep, we would call this play a held ball even though the defense did not use his hands. intent of the rule should be cognicent when ruling on a-typical situations.

I agree with 99% of what you say above.:D
If the release is prevented,at all 3 levels,it should be a held ball.The difference still is that,at the NBA level(according to what Joe wrote),it is an automatic jump ball if the ball is merely touched-while at the other levels it is travelling if the ball is touched,but that touching doesn't prevent the release of the ball(in the official's opinion).Maybe a good question for Joe Forte would be what the NBA call is if a defensive player just touched the ball with his elbow or bicep on the way by and didn't really prevent the release of the ball(in the referee's opinion).In this case,would it be travelling or a jump ball if the ball never came loose and the offensive player came down with it?If you find out,please let us know.Maybe there isn't a rules difference at all.

this is what joe put in response after my response

Crew I ask you this question forget about the high school rule, nba rule or college rule for a second.now you have played the game right ??? if so think of this.You go up for a shot and the defender places his or her hand on the ball which now prevents you from shooting the ball.You are in the playground of NY OK and you come down with the ball the defender makes a great defensive play so why would we call a travel.If the defender stops you from achieving your goal which was to shoot the ball why now would we penalize you by calling a travel when in fact the defender caused you to come back to the ground with the ball.???? The common sense thing is to call a jumpball Regardless of the fact you come down with a firm hand on the ball is irrelevant the fact that you stopped the player from completing his task is the question. Why do we need to cut hairs think about the play and what was accomplished

Crew,you and Joe are still missing the point.No one is gonna argue if a jump ball is called when the defender stops the shot.That's the right call in all rulesets.The situation we are talking about is the one where the defender merely TOUCHES the ball,doesn't stop the player from taking a shot or pass in the referee's opinion,and the player then comes down with the ball.That is travelling,and is supported in the rules as such.
There is a clear distinction in the rules about preventing a player from shooting or passing vs.merely touching the ball.

my bad j.r. i was zoned in on the original topic.

No prob,crew.:D I was just wondering if the touching/travelling held true for the NBA.From Joe's original answer,it sounded like they called a jump ball if the ball was only touched.That was what I was trying to find out,because I sureashell don't know the NBA rules very well.

All situations are different. This will all hinge on judgement. As for myself, I can keep myself out of a lot of trouble if I make myself have a patient whistle. I am sure you are a fine official. I just wanted to make sure we don't forget about slow whistles.

Todd,
Dan's whistle is so slow, the losing Coach is still waiting for that <u>last</u> second call in Dan's <u>last</u> game <u>last</u> March.
mick

Gee Mick, thanks...I think...? :)

Gee Mick, thanks...I think...? :) [/B][/QUOTE]Gee,mick posted that on August 26.Dan replies on September 18.Ergo,Dan must be as slow as his whistle.:D

Gee,mick posted that on August 26.Dan replies on September 18.Ergo,Dan must be as slow as his whistle.:D [/B][/QUOTE]

Ya gotta see the whole play to make a call. ;)