The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 30, 2011, 12:54pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: TN
Posts: 201
What Do You Have Here??

Ponder this situation and post what you think the appropriate call would be:

A1 and B5 are going for a rebound under the basket. The ball is not secured and bounces to the corner of the court where both players continue to go after it. The ball is eventually picked up by another Team A player and is moved up the court to their frontcourt. Meanwhile during the struggle for the loose ball both A1 and B5 go down. The official stays with both players and sees B5 extend his leg toward A1 as both are on the ground. It was not a full kick, but was an obvious extension and B5 was looking right at A1 when it happened. Contact was made on the torso/lower side of A1. The official whistles an Intentional Foul on B5. His ruling was that he knew he missed something that happened on the rebounding action against B5 and felt an Intentional was the right call. It didn't toss B5, but sent a message that this kind of play would not be tolerated. An observer however stated that an unsporting Technical or Flagrant Personal should have been called and that he indeed missed an elbow in the back by A1 toward B5 during rebounding action.

What do you guys think here with this description?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 30, 2011, 01:13pm
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
Sounds like a pretty good call. HTBT to determine if it was just intentional or if it was at the level of flagrant. Someone should tell the "observer" you cannot have a technical for player-to-player contact during a live ball. As to possibly missing a previous foul - he just missed it, that's all. Nothing he can do about it now. Certainly, he shouldn't "adjust" the severity of the foul he saw based on what the reason for it might have been on something he missed.
__________________
Yom HaShoah
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 30, 2011, 01:41pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: TN
Posts: 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Padgett View Post
Sounds like a pretty good call. HTBT to determine if it was just intentional or if it was at the level of flagrant. Someone should tell the "observer" you cannot have a technical for player-to-player contact during a live ball. As to possibly missing a previous foul - he just missed it, that's all. Nothing he can do about it now. Certainly, he shouldn't "adjust" the severity of the foul he saw based on what the reason for it might have been on something he missed.
Does anyone know if you could have this in NCAA Men's? The observer is a college official
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 30, 2011, 01:55pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
From the description, the official got the call right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NCHSAA View Post
An observer however stated that an unsporting Technical or Flagrant Personal should have been called and that he indeed missed an elbow in the back by A1 toward B5 during rebounding action.
These two cannot both even be options for the same action. Any action that qualifies for one isn't eligible for the other.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 30, 2011, 10:51pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCHSAA View Post
Does anyone know if you could have this in NCAA Men's? The observer is a college official
Same principle. You cannot have a technical foul for live ball contact.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2011, 01:06pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef View Post
Same principle. You cannot have a technical foul for live ball contact.
But you can have a T for unsporting conduct if there were other actions other than the contact itself that occurred....taunting/words/etc., even if there was also contact.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2011, 05:06pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 822
Swing and missing with an attempted punch and swing and missing with a leg are Flagrant Personal fouls. Thus the kick with contact could have been a Flagrant Personal. HTHBT
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2011, 05:25pm
APG APG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoochy View Post
Swing and missing with an attempted punch and swing and missing with a leg are Flagrant Personal fouls. Thus the kick with contact could have been a Flagrant Personal. HTHBT
How do you have a personal foul without contact? Unless this is a difference between NF and NCAA. Wouldn't the appropriate call be a flagrant technical for the swing and miss?
__________________
Chaos isn't a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some, given a chance to climb, they refuse. They cling to the realm, or the gods, or love. Illusions.

Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is.


Last edited by APG; Tue May 31, 2011 at 05:31pm. Reason: spelling
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2011, 05:31pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: TN
Posts: 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer View Post
How do you have a person foul without contact? Unless this is a difference between NF and NCAA. Wouldn't the appropriate call be a flagrant technical for the swing and miss?
Yes you can go with a Flagrant Technical for noncontact that displays unacceptable conduct.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2011, 05:33pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
Under NFHS rules, the original play should have been a flagrant personal foul, not an intentional personal foul.
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott

"You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2011, 06:36pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoochy View Post
Swing and missing with an attempted punch and swing and missing with a leg are Flagrant Personal fouls. Thus the kick with contact could have been a Flagrant Personal. HTHBT
Wow. Uhm, no.

The play as described in the OP is either an intentional personal or a flagrant personal. A technical just isn't an option for a live ball contact foul. Without having seen it, I'd say IP is the better option.

It sends a sufficient message, which is simply a bonus on top of being a correct ruling.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.

Last edited by Adam; Tue May 31, 2011 at 07:20pm. Reason: clarification
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2011, 07:16pm
Lighten up, Francis.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,605
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoochy View Post
Swing and missing with an attempted punch and swing and missing with a leg are Flagrant Personal fouls.
The "miss" means it's a non-contact foul, which means it can't be personal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
Wow. Uhm, no.

The play as described is either an intentional personal or a flagrant personal. A technical just isn't an option for a live ball contact foul.
I'm not sure if you're talking about the description in the original post or the description that you quoted from Zoochy. But since you responded directly to that comment, I'll just reiterate that the way Zoochy described it, as I mentioned above, it can't be a personal foul.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2011, 07:22pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrapper1 View Post
I'm not sure if you're talking about the description in the original post or the description that you quoted from Zoochy. But since you responded directly to that comment, I'll just reiterate that the way Zoochy described it, as I mentioned above, it can't be a personal foul.
Sorry, I wasn't clear (now corrected). I was referring to the OP.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2011, 08:39pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
But you can have a T for unsporting conduct if there were other actions other than the contact itself that occurred....taunting/words/etc., even if there was also contact.
I don't see your point other than stating the obvious. His question concerned a player extending his leg (kicking) and making contact to an opponent.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2011, 08:50pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
The play as described in the OP is either an intentional personal or a flagrant personal. A technical just isn't an option for a live ball contact foul. Without having seen it, I'd say IP is the better option.
From the OP:

"The official stays with both players and sees B5 extend his leg toward A1 as both are on the ground. It was not a full kick, but was an obvious extension and B5 was looking right at A1 when it happened. Contact was made on the torso/lower side of A1"

Since when is kicking an opponent an intentional foul? If he extends his leg, he makes contact, and the official calls a foul, it's got to be a kick, which is flagrant.
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott

"You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:03am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1