it was VERY atypical
 

I'm glad that my original question has
allowed for this length of discussion
and has caused at least one ref to think
about the big picture and not the strict
interpretation of the rules.

This situation (actual) was VERY ATYPICAL!

The D was trying to distract a very good
offensive player (who had already score 30 points).
Or maybe he thought it was legal to try to dislodge
the ball with his foot.
He DID NOT act in an unsporting manner.
He did NOT create or cause any disdavantage.
He did NOT do it repeatedly.
NOBODY complained.

Although I don't agree with everyone's reply, I do
understand that there is more than one way
to view a play. You probably won't EVER see this
play (my first in over 15,000 games), but if it
does happen, you'll be better prepared to deal with it.

Re: it was VERY atypical
 

This is probably a play we would have to see to call. I'm calling intentional contact w/ the baal by the foot of a defender a kick because thats what it is. Barry does not think so and chooses to give the advantage to the offensive player. If the defender kicked at the ball and took himself out of position and the offensive team ggot an easy 2 then the "kick" was penalized even though it wasn't. My question however is that if this was smart defense to counteract a talented offensive players move then we are penalizing the defense. That is why giving the defender the benefit of the doubt I will call this a kick. I haven't seen this happen in a game but I am sure that if I did 500+ games a year I would have(15000+games/30+yrs) and then I would have to decide for myself. Of course I'm sure I would be on my 3rd leg transplant by then...:rolleyes:

That is the great thing about this forum we don't have to disagree as long as looking at anothers point of view makes us a better official. IMO however when we are always right and the other person must be wrong at all costs to inflate our own ego, we are actually hurting ourselves and becoming more closeminded officials. JMO

Mick
I can give you that call, though you may want to look more at a T if the player endangered the other player by kicking at the ball to get a stoppage. Now we are beyond the original situation and we have a player taking a strategic, but reckless, act. That requires a different response in my book.

Now take a different situation. Tie game, 4 minutes left, B1 tries his goofy defensive kick and A1 blows by B1 for lay-up. It is the only time you have ever seen this. Is it possible that you blinked and missed that attempted kick, and would only notice a recuurence of that action ;)

The only reason one kick requires a different response is because the rules have been mentally modified. If we twist here, then we hafta tweak there. Where may it end?

Can I miss that call? Only if it's in my partners area. I understand what you're saying, but for me, this is a no brainer (<i>Of course, that's my modus operandi</i>).

Sitch : Tie game, 4 minutes left A1 passes to A2 but the ball gets kicked in the air to A2 for an uncontested dunk.
We all have that kick, though the result is the same as bossref's original case.

You can defend this no-call all you want, but in the end you still demand consistency. ...A kick every time, not just sometime. ;)

mick

You can defend this no-call all you want, but in the end you still demand consistency. ...A kick every time, not just sometime. ;)

[/B][/QUOTE]Agree completely,mick.The downside isn't worth it:
-what do you do if A1 misses the lay-up,and then starts bi*ching at you for not calling the kick? Awful tough to justify any response,isn't it?
-also,you lay off the whistle,A1 looks at you,sees "no call" is coming,drops the ball and then smacks B1 upside the head.This is rec ball,remember.Have fun writing that report up!

You can't say that these will never happen.The kick by the defender did,even if it took 15,000 games.

Too many bad things can happen if you ignore calls like this. You can't defend yourself if they do. JMO.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Jan 31st, 2003 at 04:29 AM]

not an every day play
 

Lots of "what ifs" by you guys.
And "it has to be called".

Have you ever seen a play where the
defender tried to kick the ball out
of the hands of a stationary player
with the ball, about to make a move?
Probably not.

The sitch that I originally spoke about
was a rare occurrence.
I judged that no advantage was gained.

I'm sure that if I (or another official)
had blown the whistle and called a kick,
it would be viewed as a good call too.

I hesitate to add another thought here, but it seems likely to me that most of the time if a player succeeds in kicking a ball being held by another player, more likely than not, there is a foul in there too . . . .