Looking for Constructive Criticism/Advice

[APG]

I can't really envision the play as you described being intentional but it's hard to say without seeing the play (cliché I know). Players attempt to draw a charge all the time, even when they realistically have no opportunity to do so. In doing so, they will move underneath offensive players after they are airborne. The only way I could see calling anything other than a common foul on this type of play is if the defender moves under the airborne offensive player and submarines the player.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

The only way I could see calling anything other than a common foul on this type of play is if the defender moves under the airborne offensive player and submarines the player.

I don't believe that this play can ever be a common foul, unless A1 is charged with a player control foul.

"A1 is on a fast break, goes up for the layup."

4-19-2: A common foul is a personal foul which is neither flagrant nor intentional nor committed against a player trying or tapping for a field goal nor a part of a double, simultaneous or multiple foul.

I would think that from stiffler3492's description, that A1 was "a player trying for a field goal".

[just another ref]

To call this intentional, does the contact have to be excessive or just the result? A1 shooting a layup. B1 arrives too late to do anything but foul.
Slight contact with the airborne shooter results in a flip, a hard landing, and a potential injury. I have no problem with an intentional call here.

This is not a legitimate attempt to play anything.

[stiffler3492]

I'll try to add a little more to the explanation of the play. B1's movements after A1 jumped for the layup resembled more of a hip check than an attempt to take a charge.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

Hip check.

Love the official NFHS signal for this. Here's how the guys on my local board learned to make the proper signal. It was difficult at first, so we had to watch the video over, and over, and over, again.

http://www.youtube.com/v/D1yEc_-J3aQ...s=1&autoplay=1

[stiffler3492]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Love the official NFHS signal for this. Here's how the guys on my local board learned to make the proper signal. It was difficult at first, so we had to watch the video over, and over, and over, again.

http://www.youtube.com/v/D1yEc_-J3aQ...s=1&autoplay=1

...Nice

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

I'll try to add a little more to the explanation of the play. B1's movements after A1 jumped for the layup resembled more of a hip check than an attempt to take a charge.

I have called this type of contact an intentional twice in my career. Once in a Adult Rec league game when A1 jumped for a rebound and B1 purposely hip checked him while in the air. The other in a GV game between bitter rivals in the first few minutes of the game A1 was driving down the lane and B2 came over in help defense and just threw her hip into A1.

[bainsey]

I had a similar play as Stiffler's a couple of years ago.

A1 had the breakaway and easy layup, but B2 was behind her, pushed her down while she was in the air, and A1 girl was in tears when she got up. It was an easy intentional foul.

Coach B still protested, claiming B2 was playing the ball. It was a laughable argument, at best. A coach will often argue this call, not because of its accuracy, but because of its consequence (two shots and the ball).

Just consider the source.

[Adam]

My view: if you think the defender purposefully undercut the shooter, call the X and explain it that simply to the coach. "Coach, what I saw was a late defender purposefully undercutting a shooter. That's intentional." Then walk away and get the free throws administered.

If it's just a late defender playing bad defense, standard shooting foul (with the caveat that excessive contact could have resulted.