Passed on Foul, so Passed on the Travel
 

We had a play where a player gets hit and loses his balance. Foul? Well my partner passed on it and the player falls to the floor in control of the ball. Travel? My partner passed on this as well since he did not call the foul which caused the travel.

I have never heard of this philosophy, not saying that is wrong, of passing on 2 things when one caused the other. Does anyone view this situation as my partner did (didnt call the foul so you cannot call the travel). Wouldn't you have to get one or the other. I see it as necessary to call the late foul, but can also see his argument as well, of passing on both if you do not get the culprit which was the foul.

I wouldn't follow this philosophy. All your partner did was take a missed call and compound it with another missed call.

This makes no sense. According to your post, your partner would have called the travel if he had first called the foul. Huh? :confused:

There was contact that caused the player to fall to the court with the ball. But my partner could not call the travel because he did not call the foul which caused the fall to the court.

If there would not have been contact then he would have had a travel. But there was contact that he passed on so he couldnt punish the player for falling to the court as a result of the contact.

Have a late whistle on the foul if you truly think it caused the travel.

Why didn't your partner come in with a late call? If by his judgment he deemed the contact not to be a foul, then you have to call the travel. How do you explain to the coach why you didn't call a travel? Your partner's philosophy doesn't make any sense to me. The tape is going to show two no-call incorrects instead of getting the initial call correct or just one missed call.

Yes, he could have called a travel so to say otherwise isn't true. However, without seeing the play it sounds like your partner should have called the foul first and the situation wouldn't have happened.

It (or something similar) happened before and it will happen again.

I agree
 

We all spoke about the play at halftime after he brought it up. And that is when he threw out his philosophy. He's a great official, but this play was a head scratcher for my other partner and I.

Call the foul late. You are only making things worse by no calling the travel. I learned this the hard way when I was younger and thought this logic made sense too. It doesn't

Clearly an advantage was gained. Even if you had originally decided to pass on the foul, now you HAVE to call it because the alternatives (call the travel or don't call the travel) are just not viable.

I wonder if I worked with your partner Saturday!

Im new T on a throw-in after a made basket & all of a sudden a defender is OOB with the thrower. I call a DOG... after the game he says the defender was pushed OOB & I shouldn't have called the DOG :eek:

Im thinking to myself, if you called the foul then I wouldnt have had to :rolleyes:

But I kept it to myself as thats what you get when they mix up the crews from different areas this time of year...

+1 to the entire thing. I too have done the "passed on the foul, have to pass on the violation" thing earlier in my career. All that happens is that you end up with TWO teams coaches and fans thinking you're an idiot on that call instead of only ONE teams coaches and fans thinking it.

Cause and effect?
 

One of our Trainers has a saying:

Never let a missed foul cause a violation, and never let a missed violation cause a foul.

So what were you looking at that you didn't see the defender get pushed?

As for the OP, I have seen this philosophy used on oob plays - "I didn't call the foul so I will give the ball back to that team" - but never on a foul that knocks a player to the floor. As others have said - late whistle on the foul would be excellent.

My other question would be - why didn't one of the other two of you (for the OP'er) come in and make the late foul call?

It wasn't my area. He was all over the play and had a reason for not making the call, so I wouldn't think about coming over there and making the call. Thrown punch, elbow, or kick and of course you have a different story

He should throw out that philosophy.

If the contact was illegal call the foul if it created a travel. If the contact was legal and then there was a travel call the travel. Not sure why that would be hard to judge. Your partner really needs to get rid of that way of thinking.

Peace

The best way to handle this is with a late whistle for the foul. Ya, it looks bad, but two missed calls is much much worse. In fact, a late call happens at other times in the game, so they're not entirely a bad thing.

If you're definitely not going to call the foul (which I do not recommend at all), then the only way to acceptably not call the travel is if it is reasonable that the player bobbled the ball before he hit the ground, and therefore only regained player control after he was already on the ground. If it is clear that control was not lost, then you have to call the travel. That's obviously a horrible call, so instead, just live with the late whistle. It's the better call than not calling either or a travel by a factor of 10.

+1

I called a foul once after the dribbled had taken 4 or 5 steps. The foul caused her to lose her balance, and before she could recover herself and the ball, she stepped on the sideline.

Coach said, "wasn't that too late?" I told her I wanted to see the whole play. I should have asked her whether I should call every bump by her players a foul immediately. :)

This is something I see a lot when working with newer officials. It is sort of an offiicals personal version of a "make up" call. It is not un - rare, but it is not a good thing. IME, it is usually a situation where the player with the ball might be a little off balance and the defender only slightly bumps the defender. The feeling is that it is 'weak' foul, and they don't feel 'confident' enough to make that call. HOPEFULLY, it passes rather quickly.
I find the old saying "Two wrongs don't make a right." Plus, you can probably explain away 1 wrong decision on a play, but it is impossible to to explain away 2 wrong decisions on the same play!! Another rule of thumb is to always "Know how a player hit the floor".

The thrower, his defender & the 2 engaged matchups in front of me. The player that got "pushed" OOB came from the Cs side & was out in lane area facing me. So if there was a push, I wouldn't have seen it.

Typically, I see it with refs in the beginning of what I consider the third stage of officiating.
1. Too scared to blow the whistle.
2. Calls everything a foul.
3. Learns about A/D and starts learning to apply it. At this point, they tend to let things go that can end up killing a game. Sometimes the whistles are too patient; but it's a learning process.

Maybe it's just me (always likely), but I'd be real hesitant to call the DoG if I didn't see how B1 got OOB; unless he was actually interfering with the throw-in.

Also, it sounds like he was likely pushed while the ball was dead; thus 99% likely there's no foul there.

Got it...partner should have either called the foul or kept his mouth shut in the locker room!

Not necessarily; what if the "push" happened during the dead ball period?

According to tref's first post on this, the thrower had the ball and was attempting to throw it in when suddenly the defender is across the line...what am I missing here?

It's possible I'm reading it wrong.

I'm still not sure. He doesn't say if it's definite that B1 crossed the line after the throw-in started; but I see how it seems likely from his post.

Again, I would be pretty hesitant to call the DoG if I didn't see the defender cross; unless he was actually interfering with (or even defending) the throw-in.

Gotcha...

I was at 3 & a click on my throw-in count (live ball) & suddenly a defender was OOB with myself & the thrower. I felt I had no other choice, by rule...

Yeah, that's a little different.

Similar situation I had in a recent game...


Backcourt endline spot throwin with the spot on the right of the basket about 1/2 way between the lane and the corner. A2 tries to curl down the opposite side and do a tightrope walk across the endline in an attempt to swing by the thrower for a short pass (handoff). However, B2 is able to cutoff A2's path just as A2 reaches the vicinity of the endline. There is contact. A2 deflects off B2 and B2 is unaffected by the contact. Assume that you judge that either B2 did not commit a foul because B2 had LGP or that there was no additional advantage gained by the contact. A2 steps OOB under the FT lane and, after regaining his balance, immediately returns inbounds. What do you have?

Throw-in violation.

Nothing.

A2 didn't leave the court for an unauthorized reason and also didn't go OOB to parrticipate in the throw-in.

That gets my vote.

While, according to the letter of the rules, you'd be correct,

this...

is what I did and did so knowingly. The intent and purpose of throwin restrictions is what led me to that result.

It sounds like the player getting fouled caused him to violate.

You must penalize the foul in this instance. Essentially anytime contact causes a turnover by way of advantage/disadvantage you should have a whistle.

Couldn't the same logic apply to the OP here and justify not calling either the foul or the travel?

Agreed with the Juggler. Better late than never. You have to have a whistle on the foul. If the coach asks, you might even want to explain that you were gonna let the bump go until the contact resulted in a travel.

Dont know if I would word it quite that way... the bump caused the travel, coach.

I don't think so.

The difference is that one situation was away from the ball and not really any part of the play that mattered while the other involved the player with the ball. I believe that play away from the ball that doesn't generate some advantage and is not a non-basketball situation need not always be as strictly adjudicated as play at the point of the ball.

The travel rules restricts a player's movement with the ball so they don't get the unfair advantage of running while holding the ball. If you let them travel because they were bumped, how far do you let them go? Unless it was in a crowd where there may have been some doubt when/if there was player control, you have to call one or the other.

The throwin restrictions are in place to force the throwing team to make a throwin that can be fairly defended. I don't see how a player getting bumped OOB away from the ball is any benefit to that player or team unless they get involved in the throwin somehow. Strictly speaking, it would be a throwin violation no matter how close or far away from the throw it was....but when they get there as a result of contact (legal contact), I'm not calling it unless it interferes with the throwin.

I have no problem with constable's words.