Player Control?

[RookieDude]

NFHS:

A1 goes up strong to the hoop...B1 is standing under the basket perfectly still...A1 dunks...comes down on B1, knocking B1 to the ground.

Whatta ya got?

Dude

[whistleblower]

Assuming b1 had legal guarding position before a1 went up, its a PC foulf on A1.

[AK ref SE]

Whistleblowers answer is correct by rule.....But not sure that I would call it....Just by opinion

[canuckrefguy]

If B1 is "under the basket", it's a no-call all the way!

Players cannot stand underneath the goal and not expect to have contact if A1 dunks. If A1 has a clear path to the hoop, he is entitled to shoot and land however he wants. If B1 is in his way, that's his problem.

Look at what the NBA did with the semi-circle around the hoop; the rationale is the same, except the NBA put the "no-foul zone" even further away from the hoop to account for the athleticism of the players.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by canuckrefguy
If B1 is "under the basket", it's a no-call all the way!

Players cannot stand underneath the goal and not expect to have contact if A1 dunks. If A1 has a clear path to the hoop, he is entitled to shoot and land however he wants. If B1 is in his way, that's his problem.

Look at what the NBA did with the semi-circle around the hoop; the rationale is the same, except the NBA put the "no-foul zone" even further away from the hoop to account for the athleticism of the players.

My goodness.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by canuckrefguy

Players cannot stand underneath the goal and not expect to have contact if A1 dunks.

Exactly - which is precisely why they stand there.

If A1 has a clear path to the hoop, he is entitled to shoot and land however he wants.

Sure, but we can call a foul if he contacts an opponent who has legal guarding position.

If B1 is in his way, that's his problem.

If by "his" you mean A1, then I'm in full agreement with you.

I tend to look at this like the game of chess - you can "prevent" a player from moving into a space by putting your knight in a position to capture any piece moved into that square. B1 is allowed to position himself such to force A1 to alter his (A1's) course - it's no different 10 feet out from the basket as it is under the basket. If A1 is not willing to change his direction: PC foul.

[RookieDude]

C'mon "Big Dogs"....don't be timid ...how do you call it?
By rule...or by "common sense"? (Is that a loaded question or what?

BTW...I called it a PC last Friday night...worst call of the season...IMO! You should of heard the screams...whew!!

Dude

[hawkk]

Originally posted by canuckrefguy
If B1 is "under the basket", it's a no-call all the way!

Players cannot stand underneath the goal and not expect to have contact if A1 dunks. If A1 has a clear path to the hoop, he is entitled to shoot and land however he wants. If B1 is in his way, that's his problem.

Look at what the NBA did with the semi-circle around the hoop; the rationale is the same, except the NBA put the "no-foul zone" even further away from the hoop to account for the athleticism of the players.

And that is why it is not a foul in the NBA, but it is a foul in NCAA and Fed -- I thought someone quoted a case book play calling this a foul some time back. Just because you dunk doesn't make it OK to run through someone to do it.

[canuckrefguy]

Sorry guys, gotta agree to disagree on this one.

We're (or at least I'm) not talking about running over someone in the process of dunking. Think about it: B1 stands UNDERNEATH the basket. A1 goes in to dunk, clear path all the way...he dunks...and the only reason B1 gets hit is because A1 HAS to land SOMEWHERE. To me, that's lousy and/or stupid defense. A1 SHOULD NOT be penalized for this. If defender is standing IN FRONT of the hoop, absolutely call the PC, but not if he's UNDER the basket. That's a terrible foul, IMHO.

If A1 dunks, and makes some concerted effort to knock over some guy just to be a dork, boom, nail him. If he dunks, does the trapeeze and knocks a guy over six feet away, nail him. But rewarding B1 for standing right underneath the hoop is not good, IMHO.

[Jurassic Referee]

Yo,Canuckrefguy!

Read NFHS casebook play 10.6.1SitD. Also read NCAA rule 4-8-1AR6.

Unless you are refereeing in the NBA,are you in the habit of ignoring plainly written rules to do your own thing?

How do you justify your call/no call to a coach/evaluator/observer/etc.?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by RookieDude
C'mon "Big Dogs"....don't be timid ...how do you call it?
By rule...or by "common sense"? (Is that a loaded question or what?

I ain't a big dog,just an old dog!

I think that the best way to handle this situation is to run it by your rules interpreter,whether it's for your local high school group or for a college conference officiating staff.They may prefer that it be called looser than the language in the appropriate rulebook.They may want it called right by the language.The key is having it called uniformly in your area by your group. If the coaches/players know what to expect,they shouldn't have any complaints.Where you always have problems is when it's a charge one night,and a no/call the next night.JMO.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by canuckrefguy
But rewarding B1 for standing right underneath the hoop is not good, IMHO.

It may not be good in your opinion, but it's the rule in high school. If your local associtaiton calls this differently, that's their business, but don't tell people on this board not to call it based on your own personal viewpoint. It's good defense, and it's PC, wipe the basket, and give the ball to B. The crowd goes wild either way, so that's not important. What matters is getting the call right, and rewarding good defense. Remember this little mantra, "High school rules, coach, high school rules!"

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by canuckrefguy
Think about it: B1 stands UNDERNEATH the basket. A1 goes in to dunk, clear path all the way...

How can A1 have a clear path if B1 is in his path?

he dunks...and the only reason B1 gets hit is because A1 HAS to land SOMEWHERE.

The only reason B1 gets hit is because A1 chose to jump even though B1 was in his path.

To me, that's lousy and/or stupid defense. A1 SHOULD NOT be penalized for this. If defender is standing IN FRONT of the hoop, absolutely call the PC, but not if he's UNDER the basket. That's a terrible foul, IMHO.

As Mark D. said, it is the essence of good defense to place yourself in the path that the opponent wants to take. B1 is attempting to force A1 to stop and take a somewhat more difficult short jumper. Increasing the difficulty of your opponent's shot, to me, is great defense.

[canuckrefguy]

Great points, all...

But I wish I could illustrate the play in question as I am visualizing it, I have no doubt many of you vets out there would no-call it all the way.

The only implication I object to is the idea that my view is some gross perversion or thumbing-of-nose at the rules, or that I pick and choose the rules I apply and officiate accordingly. Ask yourself...do I call every travel, every slap, every bump? Are there collisions that "are" no-calls?

FYI, where I come from, we play NCAA rules.

Great Debate, though!

[just another ref]

In high school ball, our common sense should tell us this, but if it does not, our rule book certainly does. When you jump up in the air, it is your responsibility not to land on your opponent if he was there first, no matter what you were doing while you were up there.