PC or did the push cause it?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

I'd go false double. Shooter gets two throws for the foul in the act of shooting with the lane cleared, then B gets the ball for a throw-in from the spot nearest the PC foul.

Spot throw-in even if the second FT was made?

[deecee]

Officiating is more that the rulebook. Sometimes the rulebook and caseplays just dont pan out in real life. You can always be safe and follow them but in those cases you have to be aware of career advancement and what not.

Expectations and interpretations are somewhat different in different parts of the country. 90% of the time it helps to be black or white as an official, but 10% IS grey. That 10% includes a huge majority of Varsity and higher officials.

You can always quote the rule book and be right and officiate the game as such, but in reality you will the exception not the norm. In some cases being the exception is very good and will help, but these are few and far between rather than just because it is in the rulebook you SHOULD do it.

There is more judgement involved than just foul or no foul.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

So?

The defender still wasn't in A1's path and thus didn't have a LGP.

If B1 is defending A1, and A1 is on the lane line just below the block facing the endline, and B1 is between A1 and the basket, I'm going to judge B1 has LGP regardless of the direction A1 is facing.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Spot throw-in even if the second FT was made?

Hmmm...hadn't processed that. Now that you've asked it seems the throw-in may be anywhere on the endline, but I'm still not 100% certain as the FTs seem separate from the enforcement of the second foul.

Just took a quick look at the casebook and couldn't find a good citation, but I'll keep looking.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

If B1 is defending A1, and A1 is on the lane line just below the block facing the endline, and B1 is between A1 and the basket, I'm going to judge B1 has LGP regardless of the direction A1 is facing.

And you would be judging incorrectly by rule.

See NFHS rule 4-23-1. Guarding is a defender legally placing their body in the PATH of an offensive opponent. If the defender is at the side, he can't be in the path.

B1 may have a legal position on the floor, but he does not have a legal guarding position. They are 2 completely different concepts.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

And you would be judging incorrectly by rule.

See NFHS rule 4-23-1. Guarding is a defender legally placing their body in the PATH of an offensive opponent. If the defender is at the side, he can't be in the path.

B1 may have a legal position on the floor, but he does not have a legal guarding position. They are 2 completely different concepts.

Is the only "path" for a player the direction they are facing? Is a post player "backing down" a defender not moving in a direction other than what they are facing? I a guard who slices laterally not going in a path to the side?

It's a somewhat silly conversation at this point as I had a bad description in my initial post and I completely understand the point you are making. That said, since "path" is not defined as only the direction a player's torso is facing (it would be stupid to define it that way) I am perfectly happy with my judgement that the path a player is taking may or may not be the direction they are facing.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Hmmm...hadn't processed that. Now that you've asked it seems the throw-in may be anywhere on the endline, but I'm still not 100% certain as the FTs seem separate from the enforcement of the second foul.

Just took a quick look at the casebook and couldn't find a good citation, but I'll keep looking.

Look at the one Slow Whistle already cited back on p.3.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Look at the one Slow Whistle already cited back on p.3.

Gracias. Glad to have that pointed out...the 'logic' part of my brain would have looked at the two events as separate and enforce the first (FTs), then the second (spot throw-in).

That's what I get for listening to myself.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

1) Is the only "path" for a player the direction they are facing?

2) Is a post player "backing down" a defender not moving in a direction other than what they are facing?

3) Is a guard who slices laterally not going in a path to the side?

4) That said, since "path" is not defined as only the direction a player's torso is facing (it would be stupid to define it that way) I am perfectly happy with my judgement that the path a player is taking may or may not be the direction they are facing.

1) No, their path is the direction that they are moving.

2) Yes, but they are also backing down in a path. And if the defender being backed down is in that path, that defender has a LGP. The defender does not have an LGP if he is at the side of the path.

3) Yes, the guard can set their path laterally. And to have a LGP, the defender must be in front of that lateral path, not to the side of it.

4)you're right, it's the direction that they're moving, not necessarily facing, that determines their path. But you were wrong when you stated that a defender standing beside that path had LGP. The defender has to be in the path to have a LGP.

It's not just semantics. It's understanding what actually comprises a LGP.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Is the only "path" for a player the direction they are facing? Is a post player "backing down" a defender not moving in a direction other than what they are facing? I a guard who slices laterally not going in a path to the side?

It's a somewhat silly conversation at this point as I had a bad description in my initial post and I completely understand the point you are making. That said, since "path" is not defined as only the direction a player's torso is facing (it would be stupid to define it that way) I am perfectly happy with my judgement that the path a player is taking may or may not be the direction they are facing.

And that direction of the Post Player would be towards the basket, where the defender is. A1 is going East/West with a B1 to his South.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Is the only "path" for a player the direction they are facing? Is a post player "backing down" a defender not moving in a direction other than what they are facing? I a guard who slices laterally not going in a path to the side?

The offensive player is the one with the "path." It doesn't matter which way he is facing. The defender is the one who must be facing this offensive player in order to establish initial legal guarding position. After doing this, he too may face any direction as he moves to maintain this position.

That being said, LGP is not necessary to have a player control foul.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The offensive player is the one with the "path." It doesn't matter which way he is facing. The defender is the one who must be facing this offensive player in order to establish initial legal guarding position. After doing this, he too may face any direction as he moves to maintain this position.

That being said, LGP is not necessary to have a player control foul.

Agreed, and what I was trying to say...direction the offense is facing is of no consequence to path and therefore LGP. Now, if the offensive player decides to move away from the basket, or laterally when the defense is between him and the basket, then I also agree the defender doesn't have (or in that case, have a reason to need) LGP.

Just running through some scenarios. Thanks for all the input guys.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Is the only "path" for a player the direction they are facing? Is a post player "backing down" a defender not moving in a direction other than what they are facing? I a guard who slices laterally not going in a path to the side?

It's a somewhat silly conversation at this point as I had a bad description in my initial post and I completely understand the point you are making. That said, since "path" is not defined as only the direction a player's torso is facing (it would be stupid to define it that way) I am perfectly happy with my judgment that the path a player is taking may or may not be the direction they are facing.

This entire arugment about path is really moot. You can make an argument just for arguments sake that B1, who is at A1's side (with A1 stationary or moving away from B1), is not in the "path" of A1....but why?

The only way it even matters is if there is contact. If there is contact, either B1 is moving towards A1 or A1 is moving towards B1 (both is also a possibility but it is the same as only B1 moving towards A1) otherwise there will be no contact and LPG is irrelevant.

If B1 is moving towards A1, B1 doesn't have LGP in any case (in the path or not) so the definition of path doesn't matter.

If A1 is moving towards B1, that measn A1 will have created a path towards B1. So, B1 will, by simple logic, be in the path of A1 anytime there is contact where B1 is not moving towards A1.

(Noting the requirements regarding LGP vs an airborne opponent).

[Anchor]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Spot throw-in even if the second FT was made?

Correct. Each foul in a false double foul carries its own penalty and is administered in order of occurrence.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Anchor

Correct. Each foul in a false double foul carries its own penalty and is administered in order of occurrence.

Allow me to re-phrase Jurassic's question:

Spot throw-in even if the second FT was made?