Poke in eye- Temple v Gtown

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jeffpea

when an official observes contact, he/she needs to determine which category the contact falls into:
1) incidental
2) marginal
3) contact that warrants a foul

of course, the key word I included above is: "observe". it is very difficult to justify calling a foul that you did not observe/see. after the play happens it may be easy to see that contact occurred (blood, visible marks, etc); but you cannot then call a foul :30 seconds after the play is whistled dead because a player has fallen to the floor. the minute you describe a play where you have observed a player getting hit/poked/scratched/etc...you've changed the situation completely.

as described in the OP, I would say this contact falls into the "incidental" contact category and I would simply resume play (with or without a sub based on the circumstances).

Assuming you see the contact, how in the world are you declaring the play in the OP to be incidental? By what reasoning?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Assuming you see the contact, how in the world are you declaring the play in the OP to be incidental? By what reasoning?

I cannot speak for Jeff, but I can speak for me (I know that sounds weird). I did not read anything that says the contact was illegal. All we know is a player falls over as if he is hit in the eye or face and play is stopped. I did not read that someone reached for the ball and was hit in the face based on that action alone. Again, I did not see the play so I cannot say for sure.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I cannot speak for Jeff, but I can speak for me (I know that sounds weird). I did not read anything that says the contact was illegal. All we know is a player falls over as if he is hit in the eye or face and play is stopped. I did not read that someone reached for the ball and was hit in the face based on that action alone. Again, I did not see the play so I cannot say for sure.

Peace

And that's my point,you don't really know from the OP; but Jeff is stating he considers it incidental. Like you, I can foresee situations where an eye poke would be incidental, but they are uncommon in comparison.

From the OP, it's entirely possible that the defender's hands were within his space while the dribbler was leading with his face. It's also entirely possible that the defender swiped at the ball and got eyeball instead.

[jeffpea]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Assuming you see the contact, how in the world are you declaring the play in the OP to be incidental? By what reasoning?

if you're assuming that I saw the contact...then I would rule that this is "contact that warrants a foul".

if you're going to assume that I did not see the contact...then I would not rule this to be a foul.