Tripping from Behind

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Nothing obfuscatory here, JR. You simply missed my point.


In the NFHS book, I see five options:
*Blocking
*Pushing
*Holding
*Hand Check
*Illegal Use

Does one push when tripping? Or hold? Or hand check? None of the above, typically. Blocking, I can see, sometimes.

If given the choices, I would say tripping mostly goes to illegal use. (If it were incidental, there would be no whistle, anyway.) It certainly isn't the perfect signal under the circumstances, but I can't find a better one of those five.

Can't be "Illegal Use"...that is short of "Illegal use of hands (arms)".

It is blocking as it is done with a leg extended outside of the player's LGP or plain legal position. If it is not outside of the player's LGP/legal position, it is not a foul.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

It is blocking as it is done with a leg extended outside of the player's LGP or plain legal position.

If the trip occurred while blocking, then it's certainly blocking. But, tripping from behind ain't blocking.

Yes, "illegal" is short for "illegal use of hands." But, I certainly don't say the entire phrase, nor do I say "hack." "Illegal" is the only applicable one left, IMO.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by bainsey

But, tripping from behind ain't blocking.

What make you say this? Tripping from behind seems to fit the definition pretty well.

4-7-1: Blocking is illegal personal contact which impedes the progress of
an opponent with or without the ball.

[just another ref]

Does it really make that much difference?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Does it really make that much difference?

No. But someone has to worry about it so they can sleep well at night I guess.

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Does it really make that much difference?

Naw, it's just another item on the long list of things that I could give a damn less about.

Everybody in the gym knows why the foul was called anyway.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Everybody in the gym knows why the foul was called anyway.

Reaching in?

[BillyMac]

"There's a difference between being tripped, and tripping." (Confucius)

[chartrusepengui]

Originally Posted by Welpe

Reaching in?

Nope - "Over The Back!!"

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Naw, it's just another item on the long list of things that I could give a damn less about.

Everybody in the gym knows why the foul was called anyway.

Apparently it's far more important to know this than the other incorrect interps that come from his association.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Apparently it's far more important to know this than the other incorrect interps that come from his association.

Word!

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Does it really make that much difference?

The difference I was hoping to hear was one which might solve the occasional protest of the offending team's coach when he says, "A BLOCK??? He wasn't even in front of him!!!" Or, "A PUSH??? He didn't even touch him with his hands!!!" (Even worse, "He didn't mean it...c'mon, let 'em play out there!!!")
At the end of all the fine responses, I guess I'd say it's six of one and half a dozen of the other. I'll go with the AP arrow on this one.
Whichever mechanic is used -- and, as your relies seem to say, both seem to fit the circumstance -- a brief, verbal word of clarification, "Tripping" along with either signal should suffice to clear up the coach's unbiased, objective, neutral, calmly expressed concern.
I thank all respondents who responded for your responsive responses.

[Scratch85]

Originally Posted by Welpe

The definition of blocking seems to fit pretty well.

Originally Posted by Welpe

What make you say this? Tripping from behind seems to fit the definition pretty well.

4-7-1: Blocking is illegal personal contact which impedes the progress of
an opponent with or without the ball.

Originally Posted by Freddy

At the end of all the fine responses, I guess I'd say it's six of one and half a dozen of the other. I'll go with the AP arrow on this one.

No need go 6 - 1/2 dozen or AP, Welpe has been trying to tell us all afternoon that it is a block. I agree. The definition in 4-7-1 defines it exactly. Why not use the correct mechanic for a block which is the correct definition of what happened?

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

No need go 6 - 1/2 dozen or AP, Welpe has been trying to tell us all afternoon that it is a block. I agree. The definition in 4-7-1 defines it exactly. Why not use the correct mechanic for a block which is the correct definition of what happened?

Thanks Scratch...now where do I send that check?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Freddy

The difference I was hoping to hear was one which might solve the occasional protest of the offending team's coach when he says, "A BLOCK??? He wasn't even in front of him!!!" Or, "A PUSH??? He didn't even touch him with his hands!!!" (Even worse, "He didn't mean it...c'mon, let 'em play out there!!!")
At the end of all the fine responses, I guess I'd say it's six of one and half a dozen of the other. I'll go with the AP arrow on this one.

Nothing you signal is going to change that response. If they feel you should have have made the call the signal is not ultimately going to change that. This is why I say what they did rather than just give a signal. Not saying it is fullproof, just knows that it gives my description of the play. I tend to not get asked what they did because I gave the answer while reporting.

Originally Posted by Freddy

Whichever mechanic is used -- and, as your relies seem to say, both seem to fit the circumstance -- a brief, verbal word of clarification, "Tripping" along with either signal should suffice to clear up the coach's unbiased, objective, neutral, calmly expressed concern.
I thank all respondents who responded for your responsive responses.

And if it does not clarify, I would not worry about it. Coaches are never satisfied if they feel you kicked the call.