Should there have been a whistle?

[SamIAm]

1st view = foul charged to A1
2nd -5th view = I don't think A1 displaced B1. If B1 was not looking to draw a foul on A1, I don't think B1 would have been displaced by A1.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by SamIAm

1st view = foul charged to A1
2nd -5th view = I don't think A1 displaced B1. If B1 was not looking to draw a foul on A1, I don't think B1 would have been displaced by A1.

A1 jumped square into B1's chest with his shoulder. I have no problem with B1 allowing himself to fall in this situation. He's not faking getting fouled, he's allowing it to happen. There's a difference.

Could he have held his ground? Maybe, but with that level of a hit, I'm not going to place the responsibility on the defender to stay standing.

[deecee]

On second thought that was L then C call - the T was completely out of the picture to have anything on that.

You have room on the endline so get deeper as well.

either way it was a missed call that could have resulted in 2 points scored. No big deal happenes every game, just take what you can learn from this and apply it in the future.

[just another ref]

Did he flop? Maybe. But while he was flopping, the guy pounded him anyway.

Just because a player recoils from the contact, thus making it less severe, doesn't mean it can't be a foul.

[ref2coach]

Stop the action at the 8 second mark, when the shoulder is hitting the defenders chest. The C's view is blocked by W23. Trail is blocked by B12 and W3. Neither B41 nor W25 is blocking the Leads view as long as the lead is deep and not closed down. Leads PCF call all the way.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by ref2coach

Stop the action at the 8 second mark, when the shoulder is hitting the defenders chest. The C's view is blocked by W23. Trail is blocked by B12 and W3. Neither B41 nor W25 is blocking the Leads view as long as the lead is deep and not closed down. Leads PCF call all the way.

Why is he blocked, though? Is it cause he's not stepping down and trying to get angles?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by SamIAm

1st view = foul charged to A1
2nd -5th view = I don't think A1 displaced B1. If B1 was not looking to draw a foul on A1, I don't think B1 would have been displaced by A1.

Nope, A1 didn't displace B1; he just knocked him flat on his azz instead.

And what's wrong with B1 trying to draw a foul? Don't coaches teach their players how to take a charge? You can't penalize the defender for playing legal defense.

[SamIAm]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Nope, A1 didn't displace B1; he just knocked him flat on his azz instead.

And what's wrong with B1 trying to draw a foul? Don't coaches teach their players how to take a charge? You can't penalize the defender for playing legal defense.

And what's wrong with B1 trying to draw a foul? That depends on how you "try to draw a foul". Flopping is "trying to draw a foul". After watching this play a couple of times, I think B1 exagerrated the contact. Certainly there was contact but I didn't see A1 go through B1.

I adjusted this one:
Don't coaches teach their players how to take a charge whether the contact was sufficient for a charge or not? (trying to draw a foul)

Surely your not taking the stance of "if the coaches teach it, it is OK".

You can't penalize the defender for playing legal defense. I agree.

[Adam]

And just because the player doesn't do everything within his power to stay upright doesn't mean he flopped. If I don't know for sure that the player could have stayed upright, then I'm going to assume he was knocked down.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

And just because the player doesn't do everything within his power to stay upright doesn't mean he flopped. If I don't know for sure that the player could have stayed upright, then I'm going to assume he was knocked down.

I think requiring players to "take a good shot" leads to a lot of no calls where fouls are more appropriate. In other words, I think you're absolutely right.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by SamIAm

Flopping is "trying to draw a foul". After watching this play a couple of times, I think B1 exagerrated the contact.

Do you know what "flopping" is? It's faking being fouled. A flop involves NO or very little contact. Are you really saying that there was NO or very little contact on that play?

If you think think that was a flop, we're looking at different films.

[justacoach]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Do you know what "flopping" is? It's faking being fouled. A flop involves NO or very little contact. Are you really saying that there was NO or very little contact on that play?

If you think think that was a flop, we're looking at different films.

Here, here, JR!!

2004-05 POINTS OF EMPHASIS

B. 'Flopping.' The defensive player or screener acting as though he or she has been charged by an opponent, when in fact he or she has not been, definitely has an impact on the game. It is detrimental to the best interests of basketball. The "actor" wants to create the false impression that he or she has been fouled in the charging/guarding situation, or while he or she is screening when in either case there is no contact or incidental contact. The "actor" falls to the court as though he or she were knocked down by the force of the contact. Those actions are designed to have a foul charged to the opponent – a foul not deserved. The "flop" also incites spectators. The rules are in place to deal with such activity and must be enforced. A technical foul is charged to the "actor" in all cases. Coaches can have a positive impact by appropriately dealing with players who fake being fouled.

It is not a part of the game. Officials must penalize the act.

[Loudwhistle]

Originally Posted by SamIAm

1st view = foul charged to A1
2nd -5th view = I don't think A1 displaced B1. If B1 was not looking to draw a foul on A1, I don't think B1 would have been displaced by A1.

No way, dead contact to chest of defender with LGP established. PC all the way!