The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 19, 2010, 09:19am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Posts: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by grunewar View Post
If it's as you described, sounds good to me.

Had an interesting travel last night in the Wisconsin vs Minnesota game too - Tubby was not pleased....his player kind of got low bridged on a rebound and lost his footing. No foul - travel. Not a happy camper.

I find these plays are ones that get the crowd in a frenzy often.
I was there, looked like the right call by Higgins.

And OP sounds like the right call also.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 19, 2010, 09:22am
9/11 - Never Forget
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 5,642
Send a message via Yahoo to grunewar
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbcof83 View Post
I was there, looked like the right call by Higgins.
Agree. It was another awkward play as described here. Defender was legally on the court and the offensive rebounder lost his balance due to their positioning......
__________________
There was the person who sent ten puns to friends, with the hope that at least one of the puns would make them laugh. No pun in ten did.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 19, 2010, 09:48am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NB/PEI, Canada
Posts: 788
First I assume he tripped over the down player. Ie. Actually contact, not just the player tripping over this own 2 feet trying to make a fancy hop over the downed player.

If it is as a result of contact I'm gonna have to go with the foul. Tough break for the kid who tried to make the hustle play though.

I can't really argue he's established a cylinder from the souls of his feet to the ceiling that extends 6 feet horizontally across the floor. He is entitled to a spot but if he was standing and his feet were set but he was bent at the waist outside his cylinder to make contact with a shoulder or sticking his arms out and clotheslining people it would be a foul. He's way outside any sorted granted space here.

Tough call to make and everyone hates your guts but I'm going with a foul.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 19, 2010, 09:54am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantherdreams View Post
First I assume he tripped over the down player. Ie. Actually contact, not just the player tripping over this own 2 feet trying to make a fancy hop over the downed player.

If it is as a result of contact I'm gonna have to go with the foul. Tough break for the kid who tried to make the hustle play though.

I can't really argue he's established a cylinder from the souls of his feet to the ceiling that extends 6 feet horizontally across the floor. He is entitled to a spot but if he was standing and his feet were set but he was bent at the waist outside his cylinder to make contact with a shoulder or sticking his arms out and clotheslining people it would be a foul. He's way outside any sorted granted space here.

Tough call to make and everyone hates your guts but I'm going with a foul.
If the player is not moving (and even if he is in certain directions) you cannot penalize a player for being on the ground in NFHS.

Verticality (or a 'cylinder') has nothing to do with it.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 19, 2010, 10:04am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NB/PEI, Canada
Posts: 788
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdw3018 View Post
If the player is not moving (and even if he is in certain directions) you cannot penalize a player for being on the ground in NFHS.

Verticality (or a 'cylinder') has nothing to do with it.
Interesting . .. can't speak for the NFHS we play FIBA. By our rule your initial legal guarding position requires both feet to a planted on the floor. Ten any contact created out side your space until you restablish a new LGP is your foul.

SO for us kid on the floor is not holding a legal guarding position and is responsible for the contact since the offense is entitled to legally take the space he's being tripped in.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 19, 2010, 10:06am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantherdreams View Post
Interesting . .. can't speak for the NFHS we play FIBA. By our rule your initial legal guarding position requires both feet to a planted on the floor. Ten any contact created out side your space until you restablish a new LGP is your foul.

SO for us kid on the floor is not holding a legal guarding position and is responsible for the contact since the offense is entitled to legally take the space he's being tripped in.
Didn't think about FIBA rules. I obviously have no idea what your rules say.

The NCAA has a clear case play that makes this contact a foul. That is not the case in NFHS, however.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 19, 2010, 10:16am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantherdreams View Post
Interesting . .. can't speak for the NFHS we play FIBA.
Then why are you? If you're answering questions using FIBA rules, you should say so in your answer. That cuts out the confusion a la posting an incorrect answer for FED rulings like you did above.

The play being discussed is not and never has been a foul under NFHS rules. NCAA rules are different.

Player on Floor Legal Guarding Position

That's just the latest thread. There are numerous other ones on this play, all containing the exact same rules citations. This seems to come up almost monthly..and it ends up being answered the exact same way monthly also.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 19, 2010, 10:22am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,174
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffpea View Post
i'm calling a foul...
1) the contact by the defensive player (who does not have LGP) is what caused the ball handler to fall - that is a foul.
2) the contact interrupted the RSBQ (rhthym, speed, balance, quickness) of the ball handler - that is a foul.
3) after establishing LGP, the defensive player did not move to maintain his LGP - that is a foul.
LGP has nothing to do with this. Assuming the player on the ground was not moving, s/he is entitled to the spot under FED rules. There's a specific case play or interp on this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee View Post
Then why are you? If you're answering questions using FIBA rules, you should say so in your answer. That cuts out the confusion a la posting an incorrect answer for FED rulings like you did above.
In fairness to Pantherdreams, the OP didn't specify a rules set (although the OP is from MI). I agree it would be helpful if all questions / answers specidifed the set; and I agree the Forum usually defaults to FED, then NCAA, then FIBA, then NBA, if not specified.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 19, 2010, 09:55am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 547
i'm calling a foul...
1) the contact by the defensive player (who does not have LGP) is what caused the ball handler to fall - that is a foul.
2) the contact interrupted the RSBQ (rhthym, speed, balance, quickness) of the ball handler - that is a foul.
3) after establishing LGP, the defensive player did not move to maintain his LGP - that is a foul.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 19, 2010, 10:05am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,896
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffpea View Post
i'm calling a foul...
1) the contact by the defensive player (who does not have LGP) is what caused the ball handler to fall - that is a foul.
2) the contact interrupted the RSBQ (rhthym, speed, balance, quickness) of the ball handler - that is a foul.
3) after establishing LGP, the defensive player did not move to maintain his LGP - that is a foul.
1. Contact that causes a player to fall is not always a foul.
2. See one.
3. A stationary player does not need LGP.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 19, 2010, 10:23am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 302
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdw3018 View Post
.
3. A stationary player does not need LGP.
[/I]

I disagree with this statement. What if a stationary player has one foot on the OOB line and there is contact?
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 19, 2010, 10:30am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,896
Quote:
Originally Posted by doubleringer View Post
[/I]

I disagree with this statement. What if a stationary player has one foot on the OOB line and there is contact?
Well, in my opinion a stationary player may contact the OOB line and still not be responsible for contact. Others will disagree with that.

It's important to understand when LGP is needed (when a defensive player is moving when contact is made) and when it's not needed (a stationary player).

Think about this...a player is facing away from the ball handler, defending another player. He is standing still. The dribbler runs over him from behind. What do you have?
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 19, 2010, 10:42am
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by doubleringer View Post
[/I]

I disagree with this statement. What if a stationary player has one foot on the OOB line and there is contact?
All the case plays and interps I've seen on this give the foul to the defense because there's no LGP. I don't like that it seems to give a free shot to the offense to run over a stationary defender who happens to have a foot on the line.

The fact is, though, a stationary player is entitled to his position on the floor, so we're left with one option, a player with a foot on the line is not in the spot legally. This explains how we can call a foul on a stationary player for getting run over. I just wish the case play didn't reference LGP for the reasoning.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 19, 2010, 10:48am
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by doubleringer View Post
[/I]

I disagree with this statement. What if a stationary player has one foot on the OOB line and there is contact?
You know LGP isn't required for a stationary player. There are plenty of plays we could come up with where a player never gains LGP yet can still draw a foul.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


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
Putting Time on the Clock for Requested Time Out CMHCoachNRef Basketball 10 Sun Mar 01, 2009 09:20pm
Long Time Lurker, First Time Poster SoInZebra Basketball 122 Mon Mar 26, 2007 04:10pm
the time displayed as post time is way off chuck chopper General / Off-Topic 2 Wed Mar 29, 2006 02:09pm
Another long time listener, first time caller Fifth And Goal Basketball 11 Wed Feb 25, 2004 10:30am
When is it time to call Time / Dead ball? Deion Softball 1 Tue Jul 01, 2003 11:50am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:53pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1