Excessive swinging of elbows

[Hornets222003]

Here's a little more information to clarify

It was a "long" defensive rebound just outside the paint just above the second free throw space. Naturally, the guards float to the ball to go for the strip. His primary defender (whom he beat to the ball) is there plus one other guard - both going for the ball. Another defender approaches from behind ( I guess he though he could sneak up and still the ball). He leans in takes a couple of swipes, but I don't think the post player knows he's there yet on account that there are 4 arms reaching for the ball from the front. He pivots away from these two, and as he does, he makes contact with the third defender.

I hope this clears up any confusion.

[Adam]

Sounds like a no-call unless it knocked the ball out.

[sseltser]

Originally Posted by Hornets222003

Here's a little more information to clarify

It was a "long" defensive rebound just outside the paint just above the second free throw space. Naturally, the guards float to the ball to go for the strip. His primary defender (whom he beat to the ball) is there plus one other guard - both going for the ball. Another defender approaches from behind ( I guess he though he could sneak up and still the ball). He leans in takes a couple of swipes, but I don't think the post player knows he's there yet on account that there are 4 arms reaching for the ball from the front. He pivots away from these two, and as he does, he makes contact with the third defender.

I hope this clears up any confusion.

I really think this is a HTBT, but I'm wondering how an extended elbow can hit a jaw, but the jaw is in A1's space. If the elbow is extended, then that, by rule, is outside the player's space.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by sseltser

I really think this is a HTBT, but I'm wondering how an extended elbow can hit a jaw, but the jaw is in A1's space. If the elbow is extended, then that, by rule, is outside the player's space.

Not necessarily. Chinning the ball doesn't mean the elbows are outside the player's space. That's the impression I got from his post, even though he said "extended." Having the player behind him leaning in and trying to swipe a ball that's in front, it's going to have to be pretty obvious that the elbow was extended and swinging excessively.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by sseltser

I really think this is a HTBT, but I'm wondering how an extended elbow can hit a jaw, but the jaw is in A1's space. If the elbow is extended, then that, by rule, is outside the player's space.

What rule?

I can't think of any rule that states that a player with the ball can't extend his elbow(s) in a normal fashion while making a legal pivot. The decision that you have to make if contact occurs is whether the defender actually did have a legal, vertical stance or not. The defender's jaw may or may not be in A'1 space, but you have to determine that on each and every play. You can't make up a one-size fits-all dictum like an extended elbow is always illegal to cover these types of call. You don't have the rules-backing to do something like that/

You have to determine first and foremost if the pivot by A1 was legal or not. The ensuing right/proper call can't be made without that determination.

Of course, it's a HTBT call though. Every single one of these elbow-swinging situations is. You have to treat each and every one as a unique play imo and judge that play solely on it's merits. And like any other judgment call, you might get one wrong some time.

[sseltser]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

What rule?

I can't think of any rule that states that a player with the ball can't extend his elbow(s) in a normal fashion while making a legal pivot. The decision that you have to make if contact occurs is whether the defender actually did have a legal, vertical stance or not. The defender's jaw may or may not be in A'1 space, but you have to determine that on each and every play. You can't make up a one-size fits-all dictum like an extended elbow is always illegal to cover these types of call. You don't have the rules-backing to do something like that/

You have to determine first and foremost if the pivot by A1 was legal or not. The ensuing right/proper call can't be made without that determination.

Of course, it's a HTBT call though. Every single one of these elbow-swinging situations is. You have to treat each and every one as a unique play imo and judge that play solely on it's merits. And like any other judgment call, you might get one wrong some time.

The rule is 4-24-6:
The extension of the elbows when the hands are on the hips or when the hands are held near the chest or when the arms are held more or less horizontally are examples of the illegal positions used.

The rules state that extending the elbows is not legal, even if you think it is "normal."

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Based on his description, there is nowayinhell that is a PC foul. It's a completely legal pivot as per NFHS rule 4-24-8:
"It is not legal to swing arms or elbows excessively. This occurs when arms and elbows are swung about while using the shoulders as pivots, and the speed of the extended arms is in excess of the rest of the body as it rotates on the hips or on the pivot foot."

There was NO excessive elbow swinging and the elbows were NOT moving faster than the torso.

I agree that there is not a one-size-fits-all way to call these. But for you to say that there is "nowayinhell" that this is a PC foul is wrong. Just because a pivot is legal, doesn't mean that the offensive player didn't cause illegal contact with his arms/elbows.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by sseltser

1)The rule is 4-24-6:

2) But for you to say that there is "nowayinhell" that this is a PC foul is wrong. Just because a pivot is legal, doesn't mean that the offensive player didn't cause illegal contact with his arms/elbows.

1) And you're treating 4-24-8 as if it doesn't exist. And 4-24-8 specifically refers to excessive and illegal elbow swinging, which is what we're discussing. Not all elbow swinging is excessive and illegal. If it was, any pivot with your arms out in a normal position would also be illegal. Do you really think that's the case?

2) There is nowayinhell you can call a PC foul or a violation on any offensive player with the ball while that player is making a LEGAL pivot. There is nothing written anywhere in the rules that will allow you to do so. To call either, you must have an illegal act of some kind to occur. And an legal pivot is NOt an illegal act. To say otherwise is simply ridiculous imo.

We're never going to agree. May I suggest that you take this to your local or state rules interpreter and ask them if an offensive player with the ball can ever be called for a PC foul or a violation while making a legal pivot.

[Kelvin green]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

1) And you're treating 4-24-8 as if it doesn't exist. And 4-24-8 specifically refers to excessive and illegal elbow swinging, which is what we're discussing. Not all elbow swinging is excessive and illegal. If it was, any pivot with your arms out in a normal position would also be illegal. Do you really think that's the case?

2) There is nowayinhell you can call a PC foul or a violation on any offensive player with the ball while that player is making a LEGAL pivot. There is nothing written anywhere in the rules that will allow you to do so. To call either, you must have an illegal act of some kind to occur. And an legal pivot is NOt an illegal act. To say otherwise is simply ridiculous imo.

We're never going to agree. May I suggest that you take this to your local or state rules interpreter and ask them if an offensive player with the ball can ever be called for a PC foul or a violation while making a legal pivot.

I have to disagree with you on this. There are several rules at play.

The elbow swing does not have to be excessive,

If the elbow extends outside the vertical plane the responsibility for contact belongs to the offense. If the defender is inside the offensive space the it is a defensive foul.
There are plenty of pivots that are wide- There are plenty of pivots that extend into other players

Rarely is there going to be contact with an elbow in my game and not have a foul. This can never be incidental, It has to be called.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Kelvin green

I have to disagree with you on this. There are several rules at play.

The elbow swing does not have to be excessive,

If the elbow extends outside the vertical plane the responsibility for contact belongs to the offense. If the defender is inside the offensive space the it is a defensive foul.
There are plenty of pivots that are wide- There are plenty of pivots that extend into other players

Kelvin, if you go back and read some of my posts, you'll see that is exactly what I have been saying all along. The only difference is the terminology.

I said that during a non-excessive elbow swing:
1) If the elbow extends outside the offensive space, then the player with the ball has not made a legal pivot if contact occurs. PC foul.
2) If the defender is inside the offensive space, the player with the ball has made a legal pivot if contact occurs. Defensive foul or no call for incidental contact---> judgment call.

That is basically what you just stated above. It is also basically the response that I received back after asking the same question of several NCAA officials.

I can't see where we disagree.

[Raymond]

2009-10 NCAA-M POE

Excessive Swinging of the Elbows
Last year, there were increases in excessive swinging of the elbows. This action should not be ignored because of the associated danger to another player. Contact resulting from an illegally thrown elbow can cause serious injury. Consequently, excessive swinging of the elbow(s) is a point of emphasis.

When the arm and elbow, with the shoulder as a base (pivot) are swung with a speed that exceeds the rest of the body as it rotates on the hips or on the pivot foot, that action is considered to be excessive. Contact, after such an action, shall not be ignored but shall be called a flagrant foul. When the player’s arm(s) and elbow(s) are swung excessively but without contact, a violation has been committed.

When the arms and elbows and the rest of the body move with the same or similarly generated speed and contact occurs, that contact is not considered to be excessive. However, the contact is illegal, and a foul shall be assessed.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

2009-10 NCAA-M POE

Excessive Swinging of the Elbows
Last year, there were increases in excessive swinging of the elbows. This action should not be ignored because of the associated danger to another player. Contact resulting from an illegally thrown elbow can cause serious injury. Consequently, excessive swinging of the elbow(s) is a point of emphasis.

When the arm and elbow, with the shoulder as a base (pivot) are swung with a speed that exceeds the rest of the body as it rotates on the hips or on the pivot foot, that action is considered to be excessive. Contact, after such an action, shall not be ignored but shall be called a flagrant foul. When the player’s arm(s) and elbow(s) are swung excessively but without contact, a violation has been committed.

When the arms and elbows and the rest of the body move with the same or similarly generated speed and contact occurs, that contact is not considered to be excessive. However, the contact is illegal, and a foul shall be assessed.

Further to this, I just e-mailed 4 very trust-worthy(to me, anyway ) sources that I know....2 current D1 mens officials and 1 each current D1/D2 womens officials. All are excellent rules people imo and all seemed to have the same take on this NCAA POE...as follows:

1) This POE applies to excessive swinging of the elbows only. There is some confusion as to how it will also apply to a normal, legal pivot when contact is made with an elbow above and below the neck of an opponent. That needs to be further clarified.

2) For elbows swung faster than the pivot:
(a) violation if no contact
(b) foul of some type for contact
(c) if the contact is above the neck, it has to be called intentional or flagrant.

3) elbows at the same speed as the pivot:
(a) no violation if no contact
(b) the positioning of the elbow is the determining factor if contact is made. You have to decide if the positioning of the elbow was inside the offensive player's normally allowed space or extended outside the normally allowed space.
(c) If the position of the elbow was inside the normally allowed space when contact occurs, any subsequent contact should be ruled incidental.
(d) If the position of the elbow was outside the normally allowed space, it should be a personal foul of some kind on the offensive player. But if the contact outside the normally allowed space also occurs above the neck of the defender, the foul then has to be ruled either intentional or flagrant.

I think that's basically exactly what I was saying, with the addition of the last part of 3(d) that says that contact outside the normally allowed space that is made above the neck having to now always be called intentional or flagrant in nature.

As I said, all four said that they thought some further clarification was needed.

Thoughts from other NCAA officials?

And please note that this is for NCAA only. Afaik, the NFHS rules already cited still apply.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

3) elbows at the same speed as the pivot:
(a) no violation if no contact
(b) the positioning of the elbow is the determining factor if contact is made. You have to decide if the positioning of the elbow was inside the offensive player's normally allowed space or extended outside the normally allowed space.
(c) If the position of the elbow was inside the normally allowed space when contact occurs, any subsequent contact should be ruled incidental.
(d) If the position of the elbow was outside the normally allowed space, it should be a personal foul of some kind on the offensive player. But if the contact outside the normally allowed space also occurs above the neck of the defender, the foul then has to be ruled either intentional or flagrant.

I think that's basically exactly what I was saying, with the addition of the last part of 3(d) that says that contact outside the normally allowed space that is made above the neck having to now always be called intentional or flagrant in nature.

Thanks for adding the highlighted block. I wasn't sure I agreed with you until you stated this. It wasn't clear that you allowed for this option when you said it couldn't possible be a PC foul when a player makes a legal pivot....but it can be a PC foul as you now have clarified in the red text above.

[Judtech]

This was brought up at the pre season rules meeting I attended. As it was explained to me I thought it made sense. 4.36.7 was designed to help eliminate the rebounding/steal plays where you saw defenders swarming around the player with the ball and the player with the ball swinging their elbows back and forth while holding on to the ball to 'create space'. When read in that light it, at least to me, makes sense b/c that is a play we all see, although more at lower level.
Article 6 is used to help with cleaning up post play. On the women's side you are not going to have a lot of post players shooting turn around jumpers elevating over their defender. What you do have are post players with skilled footwork who use their bodies very well. So when they are turning into their defender you have situations where elbows are extended as part of a post move. By focusing on Article 6 B and C. (6.A is more for screen situations) the official can determine if the actions of the offensive player are legal, at least as far as elbows are concerned.
That is how it was explained to us. IMO, the OP falls under Article 6, but since the latest clarification came down the pipe, now falls under Article 7. I do agree that more direction is needed on excessive v intentional v common foul on these plays.