The joys of my evening

[Adam]

Originally Posted by walter

Not if nothing illegal put you there. And round and round we go...

True, but that's not the argument made here. The same contact, if it happened prior to the shot being blocked, is ruled a foul. The same contact, if the shot is never blocked, is ruled a foul. Where in the rules does it say that it even matters if the shot is blocked?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I have...in every D1 conference I've watched. By the big dawgs too. And that includes your Chicago area big dawgs also btw.

Who would that be, because most of the camps I go to most of the guys are not from Illinois. And when I said before you can turn on ESPN and at least one guy that night that I have been to a camp and they have watched a game I have worked at camp, those individuals are not at all from Chicago either.

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

The definition of a foul is illegal contact on an opponent. It doesn't say anywhere that the exact SAME illegal contact magically becomes legal if a defender touches the ball. If you think hammering an airborne shooter into the fifth row is always legal if the defender got the ball, hey, feel free to call it that way.

Again you keep mischaracterizing what I have said or the situation. Most of these plays have little or nothing to do with someone being on the floor or even in the 5th row. For one I would call a foul regardless of what row they are in if the defender did not get to the ball first. After that, unless the player tried to put them there and we are just playing basketball, then most contact is going to be considered incidental (the rules covers this).

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

We've hit the usual logjam on this ever-recurring discussion. We just don't agree philosophically.

I recognized that a long time ago and never tried to convince you or others to change what you believe.

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

True, but that's not the argument made here. The same contact, if it happened prior to the shot being blocked, is ruled a foul. The same contact, if the shot is never blocked, is ruled a foul. Where in the rules does it say that it even matters if the shot is blocked?

And that's my point....well, along with the fact that I am seeing fouls called at the D1 level for contact that occurred either before, during or after a clean block. Good block or not, if the shooter is getting wiped out, the foul will be called. It's a judgment call and you have to adjudicate each and every call on it's own merit.

It's completely irrelevant if the contact is being called differently at the NCAA D1 level than high school. What matters though is...unless I'm going completely blind and stoopid....that it IS being called at the D1 level. If the Big Dawgs feel that an airborne shooter got schmucked, they'll call it...clean block or not

Sooooooo.... please don't try to tell me that type of play doesn't or shouldn't get called at the D1 level. I have cable and a dish.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by just another ref

When you have to pick your *** up off of the floor, consider it a disadvantage.

Sure, but the question is did the contact put you there or did you decide to fall down.

The question each ref has to ask is did the contact take the player to the ground or did the player dive? If the contact took the player to the ground, it shouldn't matter how nice the block was up top, the lower body contact allowed the block to happen (otherwise the defender wouldn't be close enough to make the block).

On the other hand, if the contact shouldn't have been enough to knock down the shooter, it's incidental contact even if the shooter chooses to fall down anyways.

Our standard cannot be did the shooter fall down. It must be was he knocked down.

This is the line (between what contact should unbalance a shooter and should not unbalance a shooter) that is changing with the skill level.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Sure, but the question is did the contact put you there or did you decide to fall down.

The question each ref has to ask is did the contact take the player to the ground or did the player dive? If the contact took the player to the ground, it shouldn't matter how nice the block was up top, the lower body contact allowed the block to happen (otherwise the defender wouldn't be close enough to make the block).

On the other hand, if the contact shouldn't have been enough to knock down the shooter, it's incidental contact even if the shooter chooses to fall down anyways.

Our standard cannot be did the shooter fall down. It must be was he knocked down.

This is the line (between what contact should unbalance a shooter and should not unbalance a shooter) that is changing with the skill level.

It's more than that. If the shooter is a bit unbalanced coming down and a bump from the defender caused the shooter to fall, it's not necessarily a foul, either.

Was the shooter in the NBA game "knocked down"? I really don't think so. I think he came down a bit unbalanced and got bumped and went down. So, *to me*, it's a reasonable no call.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

It's more than that. If the shooter is a bit unbalanced coming down and a bump from the defender caused the shooter to fall, it's not necessarily a foul, either.

Was the shooter in the NBA game "knocked down"? I really don't think so. I think he came down a bit unbalanced and got bumped and went down. So, *to me*, it's a reasonable no call.

Agreed.

[walter]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Sure, but the question is did the contact put you there or did you decide to fall down.

The question each ref has to ask is did the contact take the player to the ground or did the player dive? If the contact took the player to the ground, it shouldn't matter how nice the block was up top, the lower body contact allowed the block to happen (otherwise the defender wouldn't be close enough to make the block).

On the other hand, if the contact shouldn't have been enough to knock down the shooter, it's incidental contact even if the shooter chooses to fall down anyways.

Our standard cannot be did the shooter fall down. It must be was he knocked down.

This is the line (between what contact should unbalance a shooter and should not unbalance a shooter) that is changing with the skill level.

+1 Every play needs to be looked separately from start, develop, finish and then decide. The play as a whole is what makes a foul call warranted or not. I don't think anyone is arguing that there are clean block situations that can be fouls (using off hand to climb for the block, low body contact, etc). We are saying you have to see and judge the whole play.