The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Murray State vs. Butler - Player Control (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/57628-murray-state-vs-butler-player-control.html)

CDurham Sat Mar 20, 2010 04:17pm

Murray State vs. Butler - Player Control
 
Just saw a Player Control Foul called on a Murray State player. Here is the situation.

M2 drives the lane and jumps for a lay up. He releases the ball and while he is coming down, but with both feet still airborne, there is contact made on B1. Actually, I don't know if they called a Player Control or Common Foul on M2, they did shoot Free Throws on the other end so I' guessing a Common Foul.

Is the NCAA rule of "airborne shooter" different than NFHS??

Adam Sat Mar 20, 2010 04:19pm

Yes it's different with this exact result.

bas2456 Sat Mar 20, 2010 04:34pm

CDurham,

Free Download

You might want to try and download the NCAA rulebook. I've been going to it frequently over the last couple of days to answer my own questions. Page 162 says the player-control foul rule doesn't include an airborne shooter.

Nevadaref Sun Mar 21, 2010 12:25am

NCAA men's rule: a foul by an airborne shooter is NOT a player control foul and would NOT cancel a made goal if the try was released prior to the contact. Since there is no team control once the try is released the foul would NOT be a team control foul either and the opponent would be awarded FTs if in the bonus.

NCAA women's rule: matches the NFHS rule.

I saw the play and it was administered perfectly. It was also a good call on the charge.

Lcubed48 Sun Mar 21, 2010 12:48am

Old NFHS rule?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 669562)
NCAA men's rule: a foul by an airborne shooter is NOT a player control foul and would NOT cancel a made goal if the try was released prior to the contact. Since there is no team control once the try is released the foul would NOT be a team control foul either and the opponent would be awarded FTs if in the bonus.
.

Wasn't that the Fed rule also, once upon a time?

Nevadaref Sun Mar 21, 2010 12:52am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lcubed48 (Post 669565)
Wasn't that the Fed rule also, once upon a time?

Yes, changed about 20 years ago.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Sun Mar 21, 2010 06:39am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 669566)
Yes, changed about 20 years ago.


It was changed longer that 20 years ago, actually closer to 30 years ago but not quite.

MTD, Sr.

Rich Sun Mar 21, 2010 09:12am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. (Post 669576)
It was changed longer that 20 years ago, actually closer to 30 years ago but not quite.

MTD, Sr.

It's certainly greater than 22, since I've always officiated with it as a rule.

Mark Padgett Sun Mar 21, 2010 12:08pm

It changed 27 years, 4 months, 3 days, 17 hours, 12 minutes and 42 seconds ago - but who's counting? :p

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Sun Mar 21, 2010 01:22pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett (Post 669598)
It changed 27 years, 4 months, 3 days, 17 hours, 12 minutes and 42 seconds ago - but who's counting? :p


Mark:

Thank you. We old geezers have to stick together, :D.

MTD, Sr.

Mark Padgett Sun Mar 21, 2010 01:32pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. (Post 669614)
Mark:

Thank you. We old geezers have to stick together, :D.

MTD, Sr.

http://www.jokesigns.com/Old_Geezer_Sign_417.gif

BillyMac Sun Mar 21, 2010 03:55pm

Geezers Gone Wild ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett (Post 669617)

Is this available as a uniform patch?

http://www.pmcaregivers.com/images/img1390_small.jpg


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:54pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1