The joys of my evening

[M&M Guy]

I've been following these two discussions very intently, only because I want to discern the difference between the thinking on what is considered incidental contact vs. a foul.

I certainly understand the same contact can be incidental in one situation, while a foul in another. I have had conversations with coaches and players who have asked for a foul when the shooter's arm is contacted, but the shot has left the hand. They seem to feel that contact on the shooter's arm is foul no matter what, while we all agree the unfair advantage is when the contact affects the shot with the ball still in the hand, and there is no advantage once the ball has left the hand. I also understand incidental contact can be "severe", and the level of contact alone does not have a direct bearing on whether to call a foul.

But I'm still trying to understand the concept of how the bar for determining incidental contact gets changed in certain circumstances. Rich, I'm not trying to pick on you specifically, but since it's your thread, I'll ask you - how does the sitch you mentioned in this thread differ from the play in the video in the other thread? In both cases, the shooter was knocked to the floor. Now, I understand they are 2 different plays: girls vs. boys, wild swing and miss vs. body contact after clean block, etc.

But my questions come from some of the comments made about why they are so different. You say the no-call in the video is "expected" in a higher-level boys game. You also mentioned the allowed level of contact in the video would be greater because the ball went directly OOB, so there was no advantage in the shooter being knocked to the floor. Why shouldn't the same standard of protecting the shooter apply in both plays? Would your call/no-call be different if your play in this thread happened during a higher-level boys game, and the play in the video was during a girls game? Would the call in this thread be different if the ball was blocked OOB before the same contact? Would your no-call in the video play be any different if the ball stayed in-bounds after the block?

As to the comment about what is "expected" at a certain level - who gets to make that determination? Are you saying your calls/no-calls will be based on what coaches, players and fans expect? Granted, I understand you need to do what your "bosses" expect, and that could be your assignors, or even the AD's, if you contract directly with the schools. I know no one wants to be "That Guy", who makes calls outside the expected norm. But let me give you an example - I have worked with many a veteran partner who has made the "expected" call of a travel when the player is fumbling the ball while taking a couple of steps. No one ever complains when this incorrect call is made, and if the call is not made, coaches, players and fans all react negatively. (The carry violation on the high dribble is another example.) Should I start making this incorrect call, because it's "expected"? Or should I continue to make the correct call, and not worry about what the coaches and players expect? If this example isn't the same as the "expected" no-call in the video block, why is it different?