The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 25, 2010, 10:03pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 278
Ball Foul?

First year official brought this situation from an middle school game. 6 foot + player blocks shot of much smaller player and drives the player to the floor touching only the ball. Official determined it (drive to the floor) was deliberate and called a shooting foul. My initial reaction (oops) was okay. By rule, the action would need to merit a technical foul (unsportsmanlike conduct) and that is the only infraction that applies. I'll get back the the official.
__________________
Developer of phillyref.com -- local, national, global officiating information
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 25, 2010, 10:07pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,788
It is perfectly legal to push the ball while an opponent is holding it. Doesn't matter how hard. The official really messed this one up.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 25, 2010, 11:27pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,191
While I agree with Nevada in this case, without having seen this play it's really hard to tell. There's been a debate recently about whether a player can foul another (personal foul) by striking him with the ball.
The rule says live ball contact with an opponent; it doesn't exclude the possibility of using the ball. Usually, this debate occurs in the context of an offensive player pushing the defender with the ball rather than his hands. Some (I believe Nevada is in this group) will say the obvious intent is direct contact between players, others don't think this is so obvious.

Your situation is a bit different, however. Frankly, if your friend thinks the defender did it on purpose, he has to choose between an intentional personal or an unsporting technical; depending on whether you think purposeful ball on player contact can be considered a personal foul. I don't think, however, that a shooting foul is an option here.

Intentional or technical, IMO, but not a standard personal shooting foul.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 26, 2010, 12:48am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
Frankly, if your friend thinks the defender did it on purpose, he has to choose between an intentional personal or an unsporting technical; depending on whether you think purposeful ball on player contact can be considered a personal foul.
Acted upon intent to use the ball to drive an opponent to the floor qualifies as unsporting behavior. This was the judgment of the official and I would need to be there to offer a different judgment based on his description. I'm not feeling warm and fuzzy about an intentional personal foul since no direct contact occurred. Its either a technical or nothing.
__________________
Developer of phillyref.com -- local, national, global officiating information

Last edited by wanja; Tue Jan 26, 2010 at 01:04am. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 26, 2010, 12:59am
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by wanja View Post
Acted upon intent to use the ball to drive an opponent to the floor qualifies as unsporting behavior. This was the judgment of the official and I would need to be there to offer a different judgment based on his description. I'm not feeling warm and fuzzy about an intentional personal file since no direct contact occurred. Its either a technical or nothing.
Ok, let's apply the standard play:
A1 with the ball gets fed up with B1 being "too close" and uses the ball to shove him away. Call? I'm not arguing here. Although I lean towards allowing for a personal foul here, I'm not married to the idea.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 26, 2010, 01:12am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,788
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
Your situation is a bit different, however. Frankly, if your friend thinks the defender did it on purpose, he has to choose between an intentional personal or an unsporting technical; depending on whether you think purposeful ball on player contact can be considered a personal foul.
Purposely contacting the ball is what every player has a right to do. Another option is no foul at all. I would never penalize a defender who does not have control of the ball, but by being able to get his hand or hands on the ball is able to exhibit enough force to knock the opponent to the floor. That play is perfectly legal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
Ok, let's apply the standard play:
A1 with the ball gets fed up with B1 being "too close" and uses the ball to shove him away. Call? I'm not arguing here. Although I lean towards allowing for a personal foul here, I'm not married to the idea.
This play is different from the one above because the offense player has control of the ball and is using it to strike the opponent. I deem that action a technical foul.

PS Yes, I am in the camp which believes that a personal foul can only result from physical contact between the bodies of two opposing players.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 26, 2010, 01:21am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
Ok, let's apply the standard play:
A1 with the ball gets fed up with B1 being "too close" and uses the ball to shove him away. Call? I'm not arguing here. Although I lean towards allowing for a personal foul here, I'm not married to the idea.
Your example is a good one. More likely to occur and easier to determine if the action extended beyond a legitimate basketball play. My problem is getting past the definition of a personal foul that includes "illegal contact with a player".

It seems much cleaner to read contact plainly as direct player to player contact. Consider the case where a player pushes a teammate into an opponent. In that case and the case you posed, I would go with an unsporting technical. I could be convinced otherwise if there was a case or rules clarification that supported a broader definition.
__________________
Developer of phillyref.com -- local, national, global officiating information
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 26, 2010, 01:28am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref View Post
I would never penalize a defender who does not have control of the ball, but by being able to get his hand or hands on the ball is able to exhibit enough force to knock the opponent to the floor. That play is perfectly legal.
Never could get you in trouble here. Consider a scenario where a defender gets a hand on the ball, directs it to the chest of an opponent, pushes him back a few feet and then pushes him to the floor using the ball. You better have something. An extreme case to make the point that there is room for judgment and the judgment of the official in the initial case should not be summarily dismissed.
__________________
Developer of phillyref.com -- local, national, global officiating information
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 26, 2010, 01:33am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,273
I agree it's a HTBT situation.

That said, looking at the OP, it would appear that the defender and shooter both maintained continuous contact with the ball. Based on that, I'm thinking the correct call would be a held ball and you go to the AP arrow for possession. The ball becomes dead and anything that occurs thereafter is ignored by rule unless it is judged intentional or flagrant. Any resulting foul would be a T, as the ball is dead.
__________________
Meddle not in the affairs of dragons - for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup!
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 26, 2010, 01:44am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTaylor View Post
it would appear that the defender and shooter both maintained continuous contact with the ball. Based on that, I'm thinking the correct call would be a held ball and you go to the AP arrow for possession. The ball becomes dead and anything that occurs thereafter is ignored by rule unless it is judged intentional or flagrant. Any resulting foul would be a T, as the ball is dead.
Agreed. An early jump ball call either prevents or clarifies subsequent illegal action by the defender. Thanks. I'll pass that insight along.
__________________
Developer of phillyref.com -- local, national, global officiating information
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 26, 2010, 01:58am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by wanja View Post
Agreed. An early jump ball call either prevents or clarifies subsequent illegal action by the defender.
My point exactly. There's a lot to be said for having a "patient whistle" in many situations, but there are also those situations you need to jump right on top of, and I think this is one of them....especially at this level.
__________________
Meddle not in the affairs of dragons - for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup!
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 26, 2010, 02:22am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,788
Quote:
Originally Posted by wanja View Post
Never could get you in trouble here. Consider a scenario where a defender gets a hand on the ball, directs it to the chest of an opponent, pushes him back a few feet and then pushes him to the floor using the ball. You better have something. An extreme case to make the point that there is room for judgment and the judgment of the official in the initial case should not be summarily dismissed.
Maybe traveling or a held ball, but I will NEVER have a foul on that.

How's that for ya?
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 26, 2010, 07:24am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
Frankly, if your friend thinks the defender did it on purpose, he has to choose between an intentional personal or an unsporting technical; depending on whether you think purposeful ball on player contact can be considered a personal foul.
Of course, the defender did it on purpose. His purpose was to block the shot. Most if not all blocked shots are done on purpose methinks.

Blocking a shot is a basketball play. Shoving a player with the ball isn't; it's an unsporting act.

You can't penalize strength and size. I agree with Tim re: should be a held ball imo also and not a foul.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 26, 2010, 01:41pm
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
Wink

Since your partner called a shooting foul and the only contact was with the ball, apparently the ball got fouled. You should put the ball on the free throw line and let it shoot itself. Of course, you'll probably have a 10 second violation.
__________________
Yom HaShoah
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 26, 2010, 02:19pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,621
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Padgett View Post
Since your partner called a shooting foul and the only contact was with the ball, apparently the ball got fouled. You should put the ball on the free throw line and let it shoot itself. Of course, you'll probably have a 10 second violation.
OK, I'm calling your bluff. Whose ball then, wise guy?
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Live ball foul administered as a dead ball foul ML99 Football 2 Sun Nov 01, 2009 08:38am
Dead ball foul, then live ball foul? stegenref Football 13 Fri Sep 18, 2009 12:47pm
Live Ball Foul Called as Dead Ball Reffing Rev. Football 15 Wed Sep 09, 2009 01:30pm
Live Ball Treated as Dead Ball Foul GPC2 Football 9 Tue Aug 21, 2007 11:04am
Foul Ball Out or Dead Ball/Foul Ball Frank Drebin Baseball 1 Sat Apr 30, 2005 06:50am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:56am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1