PC or did the push cause it?

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by bradfordwilkins

I don't think anyone here would advocate a blocking call... or even a no call here.

The question is push or pc.

I don't know are you sure the defender had his feet planted?


KIDDING!!!

[Rich]

I know where the drive started, but the person with the perfect angle on the push/no push *and* the PC foul is the C. The C could easily get this. Gotta say, unless this is a real push that displaces (and not merely a little bump from behind) it's a PC foul (at least in my mind).

In a lot of my 3-person pregames this season, we've talked about who is going to step up on a foul in the lower half of the lane where the drive is right down the lane (like this). Most of us feel the L/C has a much better look than the T, who seems a long way away from this play. Of course the response of the official depends on whether they focus on men's or women's mechanics (if they work college ball, too). I really don't work either, and I think the L has a better chance to referee a secondary defender or even a defender that comes up from the baseline. OMMV (and does).

I wonder if the C pulled back because of how strong you came in here. To me, the message on an official coming in *this* strong can be "I've got something important to add here", right or wrong.

Good video. If possible, could you leave a few more seconds on either end of these calls (maybe 5 before and 5 after)?

[deecee]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Good video. If possible, could you leave a few more seconds on either end of these calls (maybe 5 before and 5 after)?

How about some transistions and zoom ins (like NBCEE it). Also some color commentary would be great. Clark, you have set the bar high, but it can go higher. Climb man, climb.

Oh yeah freeze frames could be useful too.

[Anchor]

We're making it too hard. It really doesn't matter what caused what. There is a foul from behind (that he landed on him is a dead giveaway) and there is a player control charge. Foul from behind ball is still live; PC ball becomes dead immediately. False double. Shoot 2 shots with an empty lane and give it to the defense for a throw-in.

The rules don't give us the leeway for what caused what. Live ball-dead ball is pretty much what we have to work with. That the player crashed the defender with a live ball is of little doubt. When the foul from behind happened (my POV is that it happened prior to the crash) is the only thing debatable. Just because he was fouled doesn't give him a free lick at the defender. OTOH, if the PC occurred first, the rear defender got lucky with a free crash.

False double. But you guys will be the only 3 in the gym that have a clue about what's going on.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Anchor

We're making it too hard. It really doesn't matter what caused what. There is a foul from behind (that he landed on him is a dead giveaway) and there is a player control charge. Foul from behind ball is still live; PC ball becomes dead immediately. False double. Shoot 2 shots with an empty lane and give it to the defense for a throw-in.

The rules don't give us the leeway for what caused what. Live ball-dead ball is pretty much what we have to work with. That the player crashed the defender with a live ball is of little doubt. When the foul from behind happened (my POV is that it happened prior to the crash) is the only thing debatable. Just because he was fouled doesn't give him a free lick at the defender. OTOH, if the PC occurred first, the rear defender got lucky with a free crash.

False double. But you guys will be the only 3 in the gym that have a clue about what's going on.

Just to get your thoughts on a similar false double scenario: what if shooter A1 is going straight up and has defender B1 with LGP to his side. Defender B2 pushes A1 from the side opposite B1. Obvious foul on B2.

Now, the ball is still live and the push from B2 causes A1 to displace and fall on top of B1. What's your call?

IMO, there is no real difference between the OP and my scenario other than your judgement that in the OP the offensive player would have committed the PC regardless of the push...and in that case, the push really didn't put him at any disadvantage, did it?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

what if shooter A1 is going straight up and has defender B1 with LGP to his side.

How can B1 have a legal guarding position to the side of A1?

Gaurding is defined as a defender legally placing their body in the path of an offensive player.

B1 can have a legal position to the side of A1, but not a legal guarding position.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

How can B1 have a legal guarding position to the side of A1?

A1's side is toward the basket.

That said, poor choice of words on my part. Just wanted to spur some discussion of when you would actually call both fouls. I agree they can happen. But it's important to be able to clearly demonstrate that a PC foul would have happened regardless and that a push still wasn't incidental if you want to call both.

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Just to get your thoughts on a similar false double scenario: what if shooter A1 is going straight up and has defender B1 with LGP to his side. Defender B2 pushes A1 from the side opposite B1. Obvious foul on B2.

Now, the ball is still live and the push from B2 causes A1 to displace and fall on top of B1. What's your call?

IMO, there is no real difference between the OP and my scenario other than your judgement that in the OP the offensive player would have committed the PC regardless of the push...and in that case, the push really didn't put him at any disadvantage, did it?

IMO you have to look at it as two completely separate acts. If the push from behind put the shooter at a disadvantage without regard to the defender in his path then you have a push on the defense. If you also judge that the player was crashing into the defender regardless of the push then you also have PC, but I would treat them separately.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by slow whistle

IMO you have to look at it as two completely separate acts. If the push from behind put the shooter at a disadvantage without regard to the defender in his path then you have a push on the defense. If you also judge that the player was crashing into the defender regardless of the push then you also have PC, but I would treat them separately.

And if A1 is pushed, I'm 99.94315313413% certain I'll judge the push to have caused the crash. If not, I'm 85% certain I'll judge the "push" to be incidental contact.

Now I'll review the video.

[Anchor]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Just to get your thoughts on a similar false double scenario: what if shooter A1 is going straight up and has defender B1 with LGP to his side. Defender B2 pushes A1 from the side opposite B1. Obvious foul on B2.

Now, the ball is still live and the push from B2 causes A1 to displace and fall on top of B1. What's your call?

IMO, there is no real difference between the OP and my scenario other than your judgement that in the OP the offensive player would have committed the PC regardless of the push...and in that case, the push really didn't put him at any disadvantage, did it?

If you actually felt that the push caused the PC crash you could easily treat that crash as incidental. In the scenario of the OP vid, there is nothing incidental about the PC crash. The defender probably fouled from behind. The PC was gonna happen with or without that help. Ball is live, call them both.

Without taking all judgment out of the game, we still got to remember that the pertinent tools we have to work with are live ball, dead ball.

[Clark Kent]

Originally Posted by Anchor

If you actually felt that the push caused the PC crash you could easily treat that crash as incidental. In the scenario of the OP vid, there is nothing incidental about the PC crash. The defender probably fouled from behind. The PC was gonna happen with or without that help. Ball is live, call them both.

You suggest both fouls be called? So we go double foul?

[Adam]

From the camera angle, this looks like a clear PC to me. The contact from the would-be shot blocker is incidental on this play due to the PC foul.

If there was a push that caused the crash, go with the push; I just can't see that from the angle of the camera.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by deecee

How about some transistions and zoom ins (like NBCEE it). Also some color commentary would be great. Clark, you have set the bar high, but it can go higher. Climb man, climb.

Oh yeah freeze frames could be useful too.

My point is that leaving a few more seconds lets the play develop more and makes it easier for viewing. But I like seeing the videos regardless.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

My point is that leaving a few more seconds lets the play develop more and makes it easier for viewing. But I like seeing the videos regardless.

I was just making a joke. I completely agree with you.