Leg Tap

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The advantage need not be physical, it could be mental. It could have the effect of disturbing the shooter's focus on subsequent shots when he/she anticipates getting poked in the leg/gut.

Except that by rule, it doesn't say "advantage/disadvantage," it talks about normal offensive and defensive movements. I don't see what rule basis there is for extending that to mental advantage.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Mental advantage.

Please pack some up, and ship some out to Mark Padgett as soon as possible.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Except that by rule, it doesn't say "advantage/disadvantage," it talks about normal offensive and defensive movements. I don't see what rule basis there is for extending that to mental advantage.

See the quote below.

"A player or team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by rule. Neither should play be permitted to develop which may lead to placing a player at a disadvantage not intended by rule."

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

See the quote below.

"A player or team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by rule. Neither should play be permitted to develop which may lead to placing a player at a disadvantage not intended by rule."

This is where I was leaning on this, I just hate deferring to the intent and purpose of the rules if I don't have to.
The fact is, it's not a basketball play, so I have no problem using this to call the foul.
Given that the rule basis is sort of stretched, though, I have no problem with an official who choses to warn the player before calling the foul.

[Judtech]

I have a foul. Even though it doesn't "appear" that it affected the shooter (even though they missed) it is a cagey play that we need to be on the look out for. Plays like this and "the spear" have been around forever, some on this board may have used it in their playing days, who knows?! One foul usually takes care of the problem. Now the shooter can shoot without thinking their leg or other body part will be contacted, and helps keep the defense honest.

[Pantherdreams]

The important question would seem to be if you call this a foul wouldn't it mean you need to call it unsportsmanlike?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

The important question would seem to be if you call this a foul wouldn't it mean you need to call it unsportsmanlike?

How so?

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

How so?

Because the defender was basically just trying to be a pain in the arse, and not really defending the shot in any manner. The defender knew very well what he was doing.

That said, a technical foul seems very out of place here. If anything, it's one of those "don't do that" hand-check fouls. If you call it, it seems "ticky-tack" to some. If you don't, it's "hey ref, didn't you see what he did?!" to others.

I submit one way to handle it is to call the foul, and give the defender a look as if to say, "what did you do THAT for?" I believe all would get the message there.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Because the defender was basically just trying to be a pain in the arse, and not really defending the shot in any manner. The defender knew very well what he was doing.

That said, a technical foul seems very out of place here. If anything, it's one of those "don't do that" hand-check fouls. If you call it, it seems "ticky-tack" to some. If you don't, it's "hey ref, didn't you see what he did?!" to others.

I submit one way to handle it is to call the foul, and give the defender a look as if to say, "what did you do THAT for?" I believe all would get the message there.

Unsportsmanlike in Panther's rule set (FIBA) is equivalent to our intentional foul. He's essentially saying we should call it intentional, unless he was speaking our language and suggesting we call a T.

Thing is you can't call a T for this by rule since it's live ball contact.