Climbing on opponent to gain greater height

[hoopguy]

Rule 10-4-D climbing on or lifting teamate to gain greater height.
Penalty - player technical.

I called this once during a jr high rec league end-of-year all star game. One kid got on his hand and knees and the other kid stepped on him and then dunked. I blew the whistle for a T and the heads of league jumped in too and yelled at the kids. It was actually kind of funny. I ended up just giving one T but after seeing a post on here I think I should have T'd up both kids(in that example) but for the event it was fine.

My post concerns the a potential glitch in a player gaining an advantage.

Situation is; A1 is shooting behind A2 screen. B2 jumps and uses his left hand on A2s shoulder to jump extra high and block A1's shot. I believe by rule all we have is a common foul on b2 against a2. This does not seem extreme enough in this instance. Also, this is a very hard call to see, especially in two person. The on ball official should be focused on the airborne shooter and may have trouble seeing the left hand of the defender and the off ball official should be looking elsewhere. I know there is no extra penalty for tricking an official but it makes it feel more severe(think soccer).

Is my ruling accurate? If so do you think the rule should be changed so that this would also be a player technical or leave alone?

[Adam]

My first thought: intentional.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

My first thought: intentional.

Due to excessive force or neutralizing an opponent's obviously advantageous position?

I know that you won't say "not a basketball play."

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

My first thought: intentional.

My first thought is that you should run that one by a few people you know and trust and get their opinion. That's a fairly common practise, especially during rebounding action, and it's similar to putting an arm on top of an opponent's shoulder so that opponent can't jump. The expected call in my experience is a common foul if the act actually gained an advantage on the rebound.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by hoopguy

Rule 10-4-D climbing on or lifting teamate to gain greater height.
Penalty - player technical.

I called this once during a jr high rec league end-of-year all star game. One kid got on his hand and knees and the other kid stepped on him and then dunked. I blew the whistle for a T and the heads of league jumped in too and yelled at the kids. It was actually kind of funny. I ended up just giving one T but after seeing a post on here I think I should have T'd up both kids(in that example) but for the event it was fine.

We've discussed that exact same play here several times and the consensus has always been that one technical foul only should be applied. The concept used is that you don't penalize somebody twice for the same act; you penalize the end result only. A similar play is a defender reaching across an oob line and hitting the ball while the thrower is holding it. Even though the defender's team may already have been issued a team warning for delay, you do not issue a "T" for breaking the plane again and a second "T" for hitting the ball. You penalize the end result only. See case book play 10.3.10SitD for the rationale used by the NFHS.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

We've discussed that exact same play here several times and the consensus has always been that one technical foul only should be applied. The concept used is that you don't penalize somebody twice for the same act; you penalize the end result only. A similar play is a defender reaching across an oob line and hitting the ball while the thrower is holding it. Even though the defender's team may already have been issued a team warning for delay, you do not issue a "T" for breaking the plane again and a second "T" for hitting the ball. You penalize the end result only. See case book play 10.3.10SitD for the rationale used by the NFHS.

+1

The penalty applies to the one unfair act, which happened to involve two players collaborating. I think the rule singles out this specific act for explicit treatment precisely in order to prevent the calling of 2 T's, which we might think to do since it involves 2 players.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

We've discussed that exact same play here several times and the consensus has always been that one technical foul only should be applied.

So, which one gets the technical foul, the climber or the climbee?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by bainsey

So, which one gets the technical foul, the climber or the climbee?

What does the case say?

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

We've discussed that exact same play here several times and the consensus has always been that one technical foul only should be applied.

Unsporting Acts

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by grunewar

Unsporting Acts

Here's some more old ones. There were others also with the same ultimate consensus that 1 "T" was appropriate. What isn't specified really is whom you should charge the "T" to---> the jumper or the teammate that he jumped off of. I'd nail the jumper; he committed the act.

Two Questions - 1) Punching the basketball and 2) Jumping off a teammate

http://forum.officiating.com/basketb...call-ever.html

Note that:
1) the case play (10-3.10SitD) that I referenced above that outlines the FED philosophy of penalizing the end result instead of applying 2 penalties for 1 act was new about 3 or 4 years ago....after the 2 discussions above. That case play fortifies the consensus of 1 "T" for 1 act.
2) MTD Sr. and I have been disagreeing with each other for one helluva long time.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by mbyron

What does the case say?

In the 2009 book I have handy, I don't see a case for this scenario. The only cases for 10-3-6 I have are obstructing the opponents vision and throw-in striking the opponents face.

If I'm left to analyze this particular case, I'd go with penalizing the climber. There's nothing wrong with getting on all fours (unless you have the ball). The infraction isn't committed until someone else steps on his back.

It's too bad there's no such thing as a multiple technical foul -- one free throw for each -- as that might be the more "just" way of handling it.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by bainsey

In the 2009 book I have handy, I don't see a case for this scenario. The only cases for 10-3-6 I have are obstructing the opponents vision and throw-in striking the opponents face.

If I'm left to analyze this particular case, I'd go with penalizing the climber. There's nothing wrong with getting on all fours (unless you have the ball). The infraction isn't committed until someone else steps on his back.

It's too bad there's no such thing as a multiple technical foul -- one free throw for each -- as that might be the more "just" way of handling it.

Sorry, I thought there was a case. I agree with your reasoning, and just in case, you could refer to the rule.

The player technical is charged for "climbing on or lifting a teammate...": so yes, it's the one who climbs who is guilty of the infraction.

[Anchor]

Originally Posted by hoopguy

Situation is; A1 is shooting behind A2 screen. B2 jumps and uses his left hand on A2s shoulder to jump extra high and block A1's shot. I believe by rule all we have is a common foul on b2 against a2. This does not seem extreme enough in this instance.

What about a similar scenario, but A3 uses the same move on A4 to reach and tap the rebound back towards the basket?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Anchor

What about a similar scenario, but A3 uses the same move on A4 to reach and tap the rebound back towards the basket?

Rule 10-4-6--climbing on a teammate to secure greater height. Gotta call the "T" if that move gave A3 an advantage to tap the rebound.

[Anchor]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Rule 10-4-6--climbing on a teammate to secure greater height. Gotta call the "T" if that move gave A3 an advantage to tap the rebound.

I'd agree with you except that your assignor will side with the coach and throw you under the bus if you do make that call, even when the video confirms it. Don't ask me how I know.