Excessive swinging of elbows

[Hornets222003]

This past weekend, I was doing an 8th grade boys game. A5 gathers a rebound and proceeds to swing an elbow behind him. There's no one near him at the time, but i couldn't judge his intentions and I didn't want something like this to happen again in the game so I blew the whistle and called a violation per 9-13-1. Although he only did it once, I thought that was excessive.

I called the violation and the scorer called me over to ask what I called. They thought it was a foul. I explained it was a violation just like traveling, illegal dribble, etc. The coach tells the scorer that I made up the call. I wasn't paying that comment any attention.

After the game, my partner says that maybe I should just stop the game and give a warning next time instead of calling the violation. I try to explain to him that that was the warning - to everyone - that I wasn't going to allow someone to swing an elbow like that. Was it the right move to call the violation?

Also, later in the game, a post player makes a legal pivot with his elbows out and contacts a defender in the jaw. I deemed it a legal move (his elbows were not moving faster than his torso, and in my mind, I though the contact was incidental since the gaurd was in his space trying to knock the ball away.

If the player makes contact with the elbow during his pivot, should I call the foul? I wasn't sure so I didn't. Thinking about it after the game, I thought that I remembered someone telling me that it was a POE at some time in the past to call that type of contact a foul.

[Adam]

1. good call.
2. Your partner ought to grow a pair.
3. coach gets a T for accusing me of making calls up.
4. If the offensive player stepped into the defender, then it's a foul. If he merely pivoted within his own space, it's not. If his elbow is truly extended as he pivots, then it's likely a foul; players are not allowed to extend their space with their arms. Normally, this contact should be a foul, but I've seen plays where the defender was hovering over top of the offensive player and got clocked as the player with the ball pivoted. No-call in that case.

[Hornets222003]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

4. If the offensive player stepped into the defender, then it's a foul. If he merely pivoted within his own space, it's not. If his elbow is truly extended as he pivots, then it's likely a foul; players are not allowed to extend their space with their arms. Normally, this contact should be a foul, but I've seen plays where the defender was hovering over top of the offensive player and got clocked as the player with the ball pivoted. No-call in that case.

As I remember it, there were about three defenders around the ball. The two in front were trying to strip the ball away, so the player pivoted away. The third defender was right behind him also trying to get the ball. I don't think that the player was fully aware of where the third defender was, but I thought that the defender was in the offensive players space.

[BillyMac]

Regarding the table thinking this was a foul. In my thirty years, excessive swinging went from being a violation, to being a technical foul, to again being a violation. That's what may have led to the confusion. I bet that the guys at the table were a bunch of old farts, like me.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I bet that the guys at the table were a bunch of old farts, like me.

[Hornets222003]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Regarding the table thinking this was a foul. In my thirty years, excessive swinging went from being a violation, to being a technical foul, to again being a violation. That's what may have led to the confusion. I bet that the guys at the table were a bunch of old farts, like me.

They were older people. It was an AAU game and parents were working the table, so I'm sure their rule knowledge was limited. Also, they had the HC of the violating team telling them that I was making up calls, so that may have led to more confusion. When I called the violation, I went up with the open hand, gave the excessive elbow mechanic (and said it verbally), and notified my partner of the throw-in spot and direction. I guess they don't see it called much, so they weren't sure what was going on.

[Judtech]

Originally Posted by Hornets222003

As I remember it, there were about three defenders around the ball. The two in front were trying to strip the ball away, so the player pivoted away. The third defender was right behind him also trying to get the ball. I don't think that the player was fully aware of where the third defender was, but I thought that the defender was in the offensive players space.

I was going to go with a player control until you posted this. Now it would be in the realm of 'have to see'. If the third defender was just playing post defense behind, then what you described would probably be a player control. Since you stated the defender was behind and trying to get the ball, that changes the play. The only thing I would add to maybe think about would be calling a foul on the defender. Since there was contact, and elbow contact is usually pretty visible, my first thought in reading your posts would be to put a whistle on it one way or the other. IMO, this would continue to help keep your game clean, just like your swinging elbow violation did earlier. (Which was a great call btw)

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Judtech

If the third defender was just playing post defense behind, then what you described would probably be a player control. Since you stated the defender was behind and trying to get the ball, that changes the play.

Why would the defender playing behind the player with the ball change the play in any way?

There is no difference rules-wise whether the defender plays behind, at the side or in front of a player with the ball. In all positions the defender can assume a legal, vertical stance as close as possible to the player with the ball. But no matter how close the defender gets, he still has to allow the player with the ball to make a legal pivot. If contact occurs with the elbow while the player with the ball is making a legal pivot, then the defender did not attain the legal, vertical stance needed by rule.

From Hornet's description, the player with the ball made a legal pivot as per the rule already cited.

Iow, there's nowayinhell it's probably player control just because the defender was behind the player with the ball. You have to judge each individual play by the action of that play solely.

And don't tell me you were taken out of context again either. That boat won't float.

[Judtech]

Nope, not taken out of context. It does not matter whether the post is being full fronted, 3/4 fronted, 1/2 fronted or being played from behind. What DOES change the play is what was posted on the second post from the OP. In the OP he stated that the 3rd defender was behind. If they are behind the post player and the post players elbow crashes into them, that would be a PC. However, inthe second post he stated the defender was behind was "trying to steal the ball". I don't know how you can attempt to steal a ball from behind without reaching through the offensive player. IMO, the actions of the defense changes the result of the play.

[MathReferee]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

In all positions the defender can assume a legal, vertical stance as close as possible to the player with the ball. But no matter how close the defender gets, he still has to allow the player with the ball to make a legal pivot. If contact occurs with the elbow while the player with the ball is making a legal pivot, then the defender did not attain the legal, vertical stance needed by rule.

Serious question: Is this comment in bold supported by rule? I know 4-23-1 gives us the guideline that there is no minimum distance a defender must give for guarding, as you pointed out. However, I have just never read anything about giving an offensive player room to make a legal pivot.

In regards to the play, I agree with Jurassic in that you have to see these plays on a case by case basis. If elbows are extended in order to create space and they make contact with a defender I am going with PC more times than not. To echo someone else that asked, wasn't this a POE for NCAA last year after the Hansborough incident? I seem to recall Adams viewing this type of contact as a PC foul and possibly intentional.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Judtech

I was going to go with a player control until you posted this. Now it would be in the realm of 'have to see'. If the third defender was just playing post defense behind, then what you described would probably be a player control. Since you stated the defender was behind and trying to get the ball, that changes the play. The only thing I would add to maybe think about would be calling a foul on the defender. Since there was contact, and elbow contact is usually pretty visible, my first thought in reading your posts would be to put a whistle on it one way or the other. IMO, this would continue to help keep your game clean, just like your swinging elbow violation did earlier. (Which was a great call btw)

Assuming the defense is in the offense's space, and the defender is the only player disadvantaged by the contact, it's a no-call. I'm not going to rub salt in the wound by calling a foul on a defender when all he did was hit the offensive player in the elbow with his face. If it knocks the ball out, call it, but if all it does is knock the defender down, no-call it.

[Judtech]

That makes sense and I would have to see the contact to judge but if the defensive player ends up on the ground, I will go with some salt on the wound. The reasons being that it will help clean up the game b/c it won't happen again. Also, another player may see what they think is an elbow that wasn't called and want to retaliate.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Hornets222003

I called the violation and the scorer called me over to ask what I called. They thought it was a foul.

I had the same thing happen to me this year: called the violation, administered the backcourt end-line throw-in, and heard the buzzer.

Like Hornets, I explained the violation to the table. The coaching staff got it, and the player understood, but some fans didn't. My teenage son had video camera in hand, and you could hear reaction as if I were nuts.

"That's called a FOUL, sir!" one cried.

"No, it's not!" My kid fired back. "Learn the rules!"

I asked the violator if he understood the call. He clearly did. I should have asked him to explain to policy-challenged.

[APG]

The exact reason this was changed from a technical foul to a violation was to get more officials to call it. In my opinion there's no reason to warn here. The first time this is called, you will surely see the excessive elbows cease.

[Judtech]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

The exact reason this was changed from a technical foul to a violation was to get more officials to call it. In my opinion there's no reason to warn here. The first time this is called, you will surely see the excessive elbows cease.

I personally like the fact they moved this back to a violation. As the case in the OP, the one whistle will put a stop to it very quickly and IMO the "punishmenet fits the crime'. To me the rule was up there with the "T" for the flop/charge.