PC or did the push cause it?
 

Another video post waiting to be critiqued!

B10 takes the ball to the basket where W5 seems to have established legal guarding position on the play, however W11 (I think that is his number) puts a hand on his back. The contact is from the back side isn't a lot, but was it enough to give A11 the foul over a PC on B10?

YouTube - Push and Charge GH game 2010

also anything else you see in the play that the Trail could have done better?

Like you said, definitely a PC if there's no contact from behind. Really hard to tell either way from this angle though.

Looks like the C is coming in and perhaps would have made a call had you not. So any discussion?

Notice how the L has fans walking IN FRONT of him! AAHHHHH. :mad: So count him out for any help. I had a kid, not paying attention, try to walk in front of me the other night. I stuck my arm out to stop him. There is no way I'm letting someone walk between me and the court during a live ball.

I've got a quintuple flagrant foul and all 10 players are ejected. There - that makes it easy.

I'm guessing you're T. If so, I like what you did - the play went left, you took a step right to get the open angle since the offense and defense were "side by side."

Hard to tell from the angle if the primary defender's push (I can't even tell if there was a hand on the back for sure) was significant. I'd have a hard time from the video having anything but a PC.

Appeared the L got straightlined by some cheerleaders. I've never understood fans/kids/whoever feeling like it's okay to walk in front of an official on the endline during play.

It certainly looks to me like the defender riding the offensive player pushed him forward -- I've got a push from behind (albeit not a great angle)

But as trail I think you can benefit from a few things

1) I think you can come down into the play more - you're out there in space a little. Yes its a big court but I think you're awfully high up... especially to be coming in with a whistle on that play.

2) You can take a few steps to the left -- you are completely straightlined on this play (again I think you can release this play with the angle you have). So you're unable to see if the defender moved under because you're looking at the back of the offensive player. You'd also be able to have a better gauge on the space (or lack of space) between the defender from behind/any arm extension.

Just in terms of positioning, Think about if the player went straight up and didn't have a collision this shot - you're going to want to be able to help on elbow hits or offensive player pushing off so you want more of a side angle.

3) Not a trail comment but How does the C NOT have a whistle here right in the middle of the paint? Or maybe he was being a little patient but I like him taking this call to the table with the L straightlined (distracted? ha) by cheerleaders

4) Especially being the only whistle I don't think you need to run down from out in space - your partners are both on top of the play - release them to watch the players if you're going to take this call.


Just my thoughts.

Wow...tough call. Clearly the type of tough call we get paid to make. I replayed it several times and IMO there's a case to be made for going either way.
Curious...any comment from B coach as to push before PC foul? Any feedback from your crew...esp. C?

It looks like the T might have straight lined himself, he could have gotten wider and closed down on the play rather than waiting to run in after he had a whistle.

As far as the play itself, it is tough to see exactly how much the contact from behind caused the player to crash into the defender. If you have the defender in that spot legally, then to me it is still a PC and depending on whether or not there is contact from behind before the PC, I might have a false double - from the video it doesn't appear that whatever contact there was from behind caused the shooter to crash into the defender.

C clearly had the best look as far as if there was a push in the back. In this case, I would expect the C and the T to have whistles with T having first crack at the call. Player control from what I could see on the video.

Or was it enough...
 

... to keep player with ball from evading the secondary defender?
It looks like your ball handler was going strong without any assistance.
Appears he tried to split the defenders, but primary defenders contact from behind prevented it. If so, you could go with push on W11.

Is your C coming in with a little 'block' action? My youtube quality is the schiznits....

impossible to tell from that angle if you ask me.

If no push- PC

If there was a push- then it's a push.

Good move Clark!
 

4) Especially being the only whistle I don't think you need to run down from out in space - your partners are both on top of the play - release them to watch the players if you're going to take this call.

Not sure it I'm interpreting your comment correctly, but I think Clark did the right thing by running closer to the actual foul(s) sight. This strategy of getting closer to a "long call" gives a perception that you were close to the play. I have PC and could also be talked into a foul by W11 but the angle is bad for me.

This looks like a casebook PC.

The offensive player was driving all the way to the basket. The contact by the primary defender is negligible as the offensive player did not make an attempt to pull up and shoot the ball. If you take away the primary defender and just look at it from the offensive player and the secondary defender you will have the same contact.

Unless the primary defender offers a shove in the back before the collision thats good defense and an offensive player forcing the action. No way I would personally have a block or a no call. PC all the way.

Cases can be made either way in a lot of calls however I truly believe that 99% of the calls are either "right" or "wrong". Here I think a block, push or no call is the incorrect way to go based on my reasoning above.

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

The question is push or pc. :p

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


KIDDING!!!

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)?

Clark Great video!!

If you are the trail on this play,I have a question.

Were you still able to see in between the players on the drive to the lane?

So what was the actual call? Did you and C talk? Details, Clark!

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.

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?

Trail stepped the wrong way; no reason to step to the middle of the court. He should have stepped down along the sideline to get a better angle to see between the players. But the Trail did great in not having a preliminary and for closing in on the play after blowing his whistle. But what I really wish is that the Lead would have a whistle and a PC foul.

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.

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

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.

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. :D

No whistle from the L or C? Ugh.
 

3 bodies crashing to the floor and no whistle at all from the L or C? I think the T did right to come in and get this (looks PC to me), but holy cow -- where were your partners?

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.

You're right that stepping down toward the endline and staying wide would have given the trail a better angle on the contact from behind and the possible PC foul, but I can't fault the trail here.

When the dribbler makes his move it looks to me like the defender is going to stay on his right hip which would make me step to the middle of the floor to see the space between the players and let my L take the secondary defender for a possible block/charge. The primary defender slows down to try for the block from behind which appears to straight-line the T but how are we to anticipate that from the initial action?

If the primary defender stays on the right hip of the shooter and the T steps wide and toward the endline he gets straight-lined, the C can't see through the defender, and the L is blocked out by the secondary defender, and no one sees the potential contact between the primary defender and the shooter.

I actually like that the T stepped to the middle of the floor. I think this call should have been made by C or the L.

I ended up ringing up W11 with a push. Although hard to tell on the video (and maybe I was wrong) but I felt he had a hand on B10's backside. Wrong or right I still don't know, because I agree from the video I don't think the contact on the back is substantial, but in the moment and from my perspective/angle as T I felt like it was.

C was coming into make a call and was going PC on it, but did a great job of holding off.

Thanks for the opinions.

Rich, I'll see if I can add a few more seconds to it for ya. :)

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.

I agree 100%, and that's why I said in my first post that I liked the step to the middle of the court.

Nobody can have that angle but the T. C should have the open angle once the defender ends up behind the dribbler, and L should pick up the secondary defender. T stepped to a place that gave him a great angle to judge the contact when the defender was on the side.

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.

YouTube - Push and Charge GH game1 2010_02_03_09_37_15.avi

longer version

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

In that situation it would make most sense to go false double, though a case could also be made for simultaneous (approx. the same time).

The fouls weren't committed by opponents on each other, so double is out. 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.

Whoever suggested double fouls -- PLEEEASE give me a break.

You are saying that you will charge O1 with a PC foul BECAUSE he was pushed by D1???

No way in h-e-double hockey sticks will that fly in a game I am officiating.

EITHER D1 pushes O1 OR O1 causes a PC foul. In this case its PC all the way as the defensive contact is negligeble and the PC was unavoidable as the offensive player clearly was bent on driving to the hoop.

Saying this could be a false double and maybe even simutaneous foul is great for discussion but in this case has no validity in the real world. In other words its fun to discuss but thats it.

I think it's a horrible suggestion -- one that is best quickly forgotten.

I happen to agree it would be a rare case to call both.

Perhaps a better case for calling it is when the player who has begun his shot is illegally contacted on the arm, but then runs over a player with legal position. The first contact obviously is illegal, but also in no way caused the second contact.

You pass on the PC?

I might be inclined to pass on the shooting foul here, as the try would have been negated by the PC, so there was no real advantage gained by the contact.

Good answer, and my first inclination as well.

I'm just curious how people would be inclined.

IMO, if you're going with the push then you need to come in strong verbalizing "PUSH" so that everyone in the gym knows you have a foul that caused the subsequent collision.

It's advice I've received from a couple of big dawgs. If you are coming in with a call that no one is expecting, then come in strong and leave no doubt what you have.

In your play, everyone expecting a PC or a block. The push call is not expected. And in this, I'm not saying your call is wrong, I'm just saying it is one of those occasions where the calling official does need to "sell" (for lack of a better word) his call.

This is essentially casebook play 4.19.9 Sit A, you are passing on the first foul?

I'd be inclined to do that, yep.

Can you ask why? Of course you can.

Because I don't want to be the first guy in my association to ever make that call. Yes, the rule is there and allows for the call. If the shooting foul was such that ignoring it would cause problems (particuarly hard rake across the arms), I'd make it. But if it's just a run of the mill slap on the arms, I'm not sure I'd make that call.

Guess I'm a coward.

So?:confused:

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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. :D

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.

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.

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.

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).

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?

Incorrect.

Just watched the longer version. I still think you should have closed down and moved closer to the sideline. But even in stepping towards the middle of the court you still should have closed down. You were a couple of steps away from the division line when you blew your whistle for a foul that occurred in the bottom half of the paint. That's a long way to come for a call.

If you called a push for a hand in back then that whistle should have come earlier. If you have a push, body-to-body, on the shot, then you were straight-lined and you are not in a position to see if there was contact.

I stand corrected.