When a block is a foul

[Judtech]

I prefer using the "push" signal, if you use the "block" signal it sometimes still baffles a coach. But that is just me

[mbyron]

Do you use a "travel" signal for backcourt violations? Oy.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Do you use a "travel" signal for backcourt violations? Oy.

Well the "push" signal means "charging" as well. So if there was a block attempt that I did not consider legal, then I would use the "push" signal. Not sure why I would use the "block" signal at all in a case like that. Then again that is me.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Well the "push" signal means "charging" as well. So if there was a block attempt that I did not consider legal, then I would use the "push" signal. Not sure why I would use the "block" signal at all in a case like that. Then again that is me.

Peace

Actually, you're right. I misspoke; generally I use the push/charge signal. Occasionally, a blocking foul is involved, though.

[Rooster]

Originally Posted by bainsey

What's everyone's opinion about a succinct explanation: "The block was clean, the body was not."?

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Skip the first part, "He got him with the body, coach."
You can usually avoid this by giving a "block" signal when reporting it.

Besides, his hygiene should have nothing to do with the play, we being completely objective and all.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bainsey

What's everyone's opinion about a succinct explanation: "The block was clean, the body was not."?

I think it's a terrible reason to call a foul and even worse as an explanation to a coach or player. If all of the people in the gym can see that the ball was blocked cleanly, calling a foul for body contact is not going to be accepted.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I think it's a terrible reason to call a foul and even worse as an explanation to a coach or player.

I disagree. If a defender is jumping toward a shooter and makes advantageous body-to-body contact, how relevant is it that the defender's hand blocked the ball?

Sometimes, partisan folks become myopic and only see the blocked shot, without looking at the whole picture.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bainsey

I disagree. If a defender is jumping toward a shooter and makes advantageous body-to-body contact, how relevant is it that the defender's hand blocked the ball?

Sometimes, partisan folks become myopic and only see the blocked shot, without looking at the whole picture.

Bainsey,
If you are already committed to a belief on this, then why did you ask for our opinions?
I merely gave you advice which I have found to work for me. If you don't like it, then don't follow it. You may certainly do as you wish when you are officiating.

Also, your response is not the typical play that I was envisioning.
Most plays do not involve a hockey-style body check followed by the player blocking the shot (yes, that's a foul), rather far more common is the player first swatting away the ball and then causing some contact with the body.
If you consistently call that a foul, you won't advance very far from what I've seen.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Bainsey,
If you are already committed to a belief on this, then why did you ask for our opinions?

It's a discussion board, NV. I'm discussing. Besides, who says I'm committed? It's all a suggestion.

Anyway, I think you're right that we're envisioning different things. The example you provide where the swat was clearly before the contact is very different from mine. Your example would seldom be a foul; mine would more frequently. No argument there.

Still, I find that, when there's clear advantageous body contact during a blocked shot, some are too keyed in on the swat that they miss the whole picture, hence my suggested phrase, "The block was clean, the body was not." It's a way of saying, "I saw the block. I'm not calling contact there." A little succinct clarity never hurts.

Of course, you'd think they'd figure it all out when you signal a push or a block, but when people see a blocked shot, the whistle causes an immediate reaction where you don't see (or don't want to see) the corresponding signal.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bainsey

What's everyone's opinion about a succinct explanation: "The block was clean, the body was not."?

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I think it's a terrible reason to call a foul and even worse as an explanation to a coach or player. If all of the people in the gym can see that the ball was blocked cleanly, calling a foul for body contact is not going to be accepted.

I agree with Nevada on this. I think that is a bad explanation.

If you work a lot of boy's basketball and this is a common call, then I think you will get run out of that level quickly. This is really the case when you have really tall and physical players that will have opponents bounce off of them on a regular basis. Maybe that works with girl's basketball (as I do not call those games), but on the boy's side this will get you killed.

Peace

[Judtech]

A good rule of thumb I learned early on is this: You can't penalize a player for being 6" taller or 100 lbs heavier. If an 80 lb player runs into a 280 player they are gonna bounce off, sometimes to hilarious results!
(See "funny" thread)

[Pantherdreams]

Another good rule of thumb is to determine which happened first.

If the block happened before the body contact then the body contact is going to have to be pretty excessive and obviously the defenses fault before I'm calling a foul.

If the defense is causing contact with the body prior to the shot it had better be fairly minor if they then end up blocking a shot as a result to not have it be a foul call.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Judtech

If an 80 lb player runs into a 280 player they are gonna bounce off, sometimes to hilarious results!

I see you've worked middle school.

[Adam]

No-calling this does not go over well with parents in JVG games. We had a couple of great blocks with some incidental body contact and you'd have thought we'd assaulted the shooters ourselves.

Had a play on a fast break where my partner no-called it. I was trail and didn't see anything. Coach goes through all three of us, when he gets to me, I just respond, "Coach, I couldn't see it from here." Fan behind me: "I could see it from here." I laughed to myself. Okay, not completely to myself.

[DLH17]

Originally Posted by bainsey

It's a discussion board, NV. I'm discussing. Besides, who says I'm committed? It's all a suggestion.

Anyway, I think you're right that we're envisioning different things. The example you provide where the swat was clearly before the contact is very different from mine. Your example would seldom be a foul; mine would more frequently. No argument there.

Still, I find that, when there's clear advantageous body contact during a blocked shot, some are too keyed in on the swat that they miss the whole picture, hence my suggested phrase, "The block was clean, the body was not." It's a way of saying, "I saw the block. I'm not calling contact there." A little succinct clarity never hurts.

Of course, you'd think they'd figure it all out when you signal a push or a block, but when people see a blocked shot, the whistle causes an immediate reaction where you don't see (or don't want to see) the corresponding signal.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.