Obstruction play
 

I don't want to fill the posts with all these random plays by some fella that is still learning the game, but a friend asked me to post this one. So if you can tolerate one more play I enjoy your insight.

This is a typically play that I see often. The Defender (I feel) established LGP, however his knees may be slightly outside the "normal" stance or the shoulder width stance. The offensive player does what he can to avoid contact yet there is still contact. Is this one I should've passed on?

YouTube - CHWJ_Block 2010_01_20_16_28_04.avi

Thanks

The contact clearly effected the shot. Block all the way.

If the defender stuck his knees beyond the normal stance, he's responsible for the contact. If the contact disrupts the shooter (in this case), it's a foul.

This camera angle doesn't give much of an answer about either question, though, due to the players in the way. I can't tell if his knee was out, so I'll take your word on it.

Personally, I don't like knees and elbows going out, especially on a dribble drive like this, so I'd be inclined to have a foul to stop the behavior. It looks like his shot was sufficiently affected to justify it.

Question, would you have counted the basket?

Tough angle from what I can tell. HTBT to get a better view but I'm leaning more to a play on.

Blocking foul and two shots for me

I'm not questioning the two shots, I just thought I'd add a question of whether the basket should have counted if it went in.

IOW, is this a play where you'd wave off a basket and award two free throws?

I watched it again and see your point now. After he heard the whistle, he throws it up hoping for two shots. Good call

Good question Snaq.....I'm not sure. I awarded 2 shots, but didn't think about it going in. Yes I think I would have. Other opinions may show I'd be wrong ;)

I'm not saying you'd have been wrong, just thought it was worth discussing. My question really is, did he travel before the shot was released (but after the foul)?

I think he was definitely gathering for the shot prior to the foul.

Really hard to tell from the video if his knees were truly "out." If it was and that's where contact was, block. If not, I've probably got a "play on."

No no I like the discussion....I'm ok being picked on too. If I was wrong I learn.

But in this case I believe he had gathered. He had no where else to go and had picked up his dribble prior both to the whistle and to the contact IMO. I am not sure if he travels as he lands on his left foot with his right foot (pivot) not touching the ground before the release.

I'd say you were right, then. I can't see the right foot very well, so I wasn't sure. I didn't think he traveled, but thought it was interesting that this is close to being one of those rare plays where you'd have to (by rule anyway) wave off a basket and award two free throws.

BTW, this is a great get from C.

The player had begun gathering the ball prior to contact so the shot will be good.

Secondly unless the defense does something to warrant the block this is a nocall in my book as the defense had guarding position. IF anything its a PC.

But like I said unless the defender does something like stick the knee out or move sideways into the offensive player this is one of those that look bad, but an incorrect call is worse.

I will say in the heat of the moment I might be apt to make a block call as well. Just got to be there to be able to correctly judge in the game.

New Blood
 

Clark,
First off, don't feel like you're hogging up the forum with your posted plays, they are totally relevant to reffing and great conversation pieces. I'm hungry for new posts on the forum and look forward to new blood. People who don't want to read or participate can choose to not click that particular post. (These beat the holy crap out of some posts about telling the reff a player has a shoe untied or similar WGAFF questions) This is a worthy post. The angle is tough for me, however, if a knee was put out and I do believe it was then a blocking foul should have been called. From the way you called the foul there is no doubt in my mind that you saw something and I thought you sold it well. All your body movements showed confidence: whistle, fist, indicate foul, done! Kind of biff, bam, boom. I do this almost the same. A question that I have is how many officials would show a blocking foul 2 or 3 times instead of just once? I am a hyper kind of guy and worry that I indicate the foul type to quickly and then head for the table. Thoughts? (Glad you didn't indicate the block with the tickle my waste signal!):D

Snaqs and Wellmer (aka Hitch Them Pants Up High, :D) have questioned whether two free throws should have been awarded for the blocking foul because A1 released the ball after the T's whistle. The answer is yes (assuming that A1 had picked up his dribble before he was fouled by B1, and from what I can see on the video, that is what I see).

Remember what the definition of continous motion tells us. And that is that a player can finish any legal footwork after the foul and before the release of the attempt. It is no different that if A1 had been fouled while in the air but before he was able to release the ball for the attempt.

MTD, Sr.

P.S. Good night all. I have to get some sleep before I make a courier run at midnight.

Mark, while I agree completely with what you say, I think the questioning by both Snaqs and Wellmer had to do with whether, after the foul, the offensive player had either committed a violation that would negate the try, or ended the try and started another.

From what I've seen, I don't see anything illegal and would judge that the entire action consisted of one try. However, it's possible he traveled prior to the try...can't tell for sure from the video.

deecee, I'm partly going off of the description from the official who was there, the C, who suggested his knee went out (memory can be a funny thing) and partly from the video which seems to me to substantiate that memory.

Mr. Sr.,
I wish you'd gotten some sleep before slandering me like this. :)

I'm fully aware of the defiition of continuous motion and how it applies to this play. Further, I've never stated, anywhere, that the timing of the release with regard to the whistle (it was C's whistle in this case) is even relevant to anything.

My question on this one was, clearly stated as jdw caught, whether A1 traveled between the time of the illegal contact and the release of the try. Wellmer's question, equally valid, was whether or not A1 gave up on his try only to begin a 2nd one after the foul was committed.

Now, while I think this play was a good chance to have this discussion (apologies to Mr. Kent for hijacking the thread), I agree that he neither traveled nor ended his initial try before releasing the ball.

Going back to the original video, I'm not sure it's a foul. I can't tell whether he moves his knee after he takes his stance. If he didn't slide his knee into the path of the dribbler, I'd say no foul. I can't say for sure, but if he just lined up, planted and held, then I'd say his stance with within "normal" range, and he gets benefit for a good defensive play. But if his knee slides at all toward the dribbler, then it's a no-brainer.

I would say an additional factor is if he planted a position with the feet spread unnaturally apart. He's entitled to a normal defensive stance, not an extra wide one.

Right, but I don't think the defensive stance in the video is unnaturally wide. I guess I didn't say that very well.

That's not enough. Player's gather the ball prior to passing as well.
We need to see the start of the shooting motion in order to award FTs.

That varies from play to play, but it is certainly more than just gathering the ball.

Same comment as I just made to deecee. Sorry, but that doesn't constitute habitual motion.

I agree, I am thinking this is not a foul. At least not based on the angle we have. I could see this as nothing if the defender never leaned over or stuck out his leg.

Also, was this a woman working this game?

Peace

I disagree, just gathering the ball allows the player to pass or shoot. I dont judge intent I just wait to see - the player might have intended to pass but after the shot changed it who knows. I dont make that assessment.

Agreed. I've been taught that the gathering of the ball - especially as the player is moving as in a layup or a 'runner' - is the beginning of the shooting motion.

If the player is fouled as he is gathering the ball and continues through to his shooting motion, it's a shooting foul.

That is the way I was taught and what we teach.

Peace

No apology needed....hijack away!

Yup...she is pretty darn good. Played D1 and now works D1 on the woman's side as does the Lead

Ok Ok....now you all have me questioning this call more than I had previously (which is a good thing if I can learn from it). Can we run through the different scenieros for a moment.

Option 1. Assumption his knee extended and W5 didn't travel we have what C has in the video. A block and two shots correct?

Option 2. With the assumption that I was wrong on the "wider than normal" stance or the knee (which I easily could have been) but the assumption that W5 didn't travel, then we just have a no call on a shot correct?

Option 3. A no call on the block, and a travel = a travel

Option 4. A blocking foul, but a travel by W5 after the foul, then we have what Snaq mentioned earlier with a rare situation where because the travel created a non-legal shot attempt we award White the ball on the baseline. Correct?

What would be the proper mechanic for Option 4? Blow, fist, waive off shot, block signal, point baseline then report?

I agree on the first three.
For #4, if the act of shooting begun prior to the foul, but the travel occurred before the release, then you would have a blocking foul and 2FTs. The try would not count because it was not legal. I've called this exactly once in fifteen years of officiating. I elected to signal in this order: 1. fist up for the foul, 2. give the block signal, 3. wave off the shot, 4. pointed to the shooter's feet and signaled a travel, 5. indicated two shots.

I gave the coach of the shooting team a quick verbal explanation after reporting to the table. I simply told him that although his player was fouled in the act of shooting, I couldn't count the basket because the goal wasn't made legally because the kid traveled first. He accepted it and we went ahead with the FTs.

I have to credit this forum for helping me get that one. I would never have been so smooth and confident about it, if I hadn't discussed the situation here before, and known in my mind how to call it.

Nevada already addressed this, but since I came up here, I'll correct it as well. It's the rare case where you would wave off a shot and award two free throws for a shooting foul. I've never called it.

Nothing wrong with that. It was just something I do not see around here very much if at all.

Peace

What's that? Women working boys ball? Happens all the time here, more so than my last two locales.

First off all there are not a lot of women here period that officiate in my area. And when I do see them, they usually get a shot to work college pretty early. And the coaches have such a need to see them at the girl's varsity level; they get every chance to work those levels as well. It does not happen very often around here for those reasons. I am sure some assignors will not hire them for boy's games, but the numbers are so low and working college ball hurts the opportunities to work high school ball.

Peace

Couldn't you say the travel was caused by the foul, therefore,.. it doesn't count, ...somehow,... ..

I've never seen this called, either, and just kinda wondering ....

What doesn't count? The travel? The foul? The shot?

By rule, no. Consider this play:

A1 jumps to shoot, gets fouled in the air, and releases the shot after she lands. Would you want to count that? There has to be some point where the try ends and a new one starts.

The rule says traveling causes the ball to become dead, and makes no exception for shooting fouls. A dead ball cannot score.

NevadaRef:

See JR's post (#28) above. I rest my case.

MTD, Sr.

I am Confused Here!
 

Sorry I am confused....If the foul is on the ball handler who is in the act of shooting, how does the shooter then travel and lose the opportunity for a made bucket? I would imagine that to be a difficult explanation to the offensive coach....your man was fouled, but then he traveled....Please explain.....

I think that is a concise and commendable explanation.

Let me ask you the alternative, then. In the play to which you responded, would you allow that basket? I can explain this very quickly to a coach.

I've found that coaches will generally (not always) be ok with your explanation if you have one. The fact is, this is a rare play anyway.

The rule is pretty clear, though. Ball is dead on an offensive violation. Basket cannot count because a dead ball can't score.