Sideline: Forced OOB

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by MN BB Ref
But the dribbler didn't avoid contact...

Thanks...

Simply avoiding contact is not the issue.

[ChuckElias]

None of us here, except Sven, saw the play in question. So perhaps we are each seeing a differing degree of contact. With that in mind, this is probably my last two cents on the subject.

In the very first post of the thread, Sven has told us that the defender was not displaced, and that the dribbler was able to go around the defender. Since the defender was not displaced, the probability that I'm going to call a PC here is next to nil. The defender has not been hindered from performing any further normal defensive maneuvers. She's still standing exactly where she was. So I see no way that you could call the contact illegal. Therefore, no PC.

Because the defender legally placed herself directly in the dribbler's path, the dribbler was forced to go around. She was able to do this; although the slight contact with the defender caused her to step OOB. (I refuse to even discuss a T for being OOB here! ) But since the defender was there legally (we stipulated that earlier in the thread), this cannot be a blocking foul. The dribbler was able to keep the ball inbounds and was able to return her feet inbounds before touching the ball again. So no OOB call -- unless you judge that she continued her dribble when she stepped OOB.

So what do we have? No way I'm calling a PC without displacement in this situation. Even less chance of calling a blocking foul. The ball never went OOB. What we have is great defense and a very athletic point guard. No call.

Chuck

[MN 3 Sport Ref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
None of us here, except Sven, saw the play in question. So perhaps we are each seeing a differing degree of contact. With that in mind, this is probably my last two cents on the subject.

In the very first post of the thread, Sven has told us that the defender was not displaced, and that the dribbler was able to go around the defender. Since the defender was not displaced, the probability that I'm going to call a PC here is next to nil. The defender has not been hindered from performing any further normal defensive maneuvers. She's still standing exactly where she was. So I see no way that you could call the contact illegal. Therefore, no PC.

Because the defender legally placed herself directly in the dribbler's path, the dribbler was forced to go around. She was able to do this; although the slight contact with the defender caused her to step OOB. (I refuse to even discuss a T for being OOB here! ) But since the defender was there legally (we stipulated that earlier in the thread), this cannot be a blocking foul. The dribbler was able to keep the ball inbounds and was able to return her feet inbounds before touching the ball again. So no OOB call -- unless you judge that she continued her dribble when she stepped OOB.

So what do we have? No way I'm calling a PC without displacement in this situation. Even less chance of calling a blocking foul. The ball never went OOB. What we have is great defense and a very athletic point guard. No call.

Chuck

Chuck: If the play happens as you describe it here I am w/ you 100%. I think it is very true that we sometimes add things to case plays on this forum. It creates great discussion.

what I am asking now is, the defender is planted on the sideline so the dribbler has to go OOB to avoid contact. She/he pushes the ball forward just before the contact, goes around the defender OOB and returns inbounds and continues the dribble. Have anything???

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by MN 3 Sport Ref
the defender is planted on the sideline so the dribbler has to go OOB to avoid contact. She/he pushes the ball forward just before the contact, goes around the defender OOB and returns inbounds and continues the dribble. Have anything???

From my extremely good position, I can say without doubt that the dribbler's momentum carried her OOB. As long as she does not delay in returning, we play on.

Chuck

[Hawks Coach]

Think about how charges are frequently called. If there is slight contact and the defender seems to yield, a charge is rarely called. If there is more forcible contact and the defender is clearly displaced, it is likely to be called either a block or a charge.

So all contact is not a foul, and lsight contact is frequently allowed (otherwise you'd be stopping play all the time).

As for an unfair advantage gpoing to the offense as a result of the no-call, I am not sure that A letting the ball get away is is a huge advantage. During that time that ball ball was not under A's positive control, B could have taken the ball (and a good, alert defensive team would have done so!).

[MN BB Ref]

I'm not so sure about this one. From reading the situation proposed by MN 3 Sport Ref, it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that the dribbler was attempting to circumvent the rules by intentionally going OOB to avoid the defender, thus continuing her progress with the ball.

Once again in a game situation this all happens so fast that you don't have the luxury that we have now of debating the situation and pontificating on the intent of the player.

Dave

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
So what do we have? No way I'm calling a PC without displacement in this situation. Even less chance of calling a blocking foul. The ball never went OOB. What we have is great defense and a very athletic point guard. No call.

After I read this, I went back and looked at the original post again, to be sure I remembered correctly, and sure enough, it said "Middle School Girls." I agree with Chuck about the fouls, not enough contact (frm the description), but I think it highly unlikely that a MS player could pull off the keep the ball in and step back inbounds before touching the ball. Maybe in a freak situation it could happen, but I'm guessing I'd call OOB.

[MN 3 Sport Ref]

Originally posted by MN BB Ref
I'm not so sure about this one. From reading the situation proposed by MN 3 Sport Ref, it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that the dribbler was attempting to circumvent the rules by intentionally going OOB to avoid the defender, thus continuing her progress with the ball.

Once again in a game situation this all happens so fast that you don't have the luxury that we have now of debating the situation and pontificating on the intent of the player.

Dave

This is exactly what I am driving at here. This happens in a HS varsity or college game, what do you have (NOT MS we have seperate rules for those) A defensive player gets good defensive position abutting the sideline and the dribbler pushes the ball around the defender goes around the defender OOB, returns inbounds and continues dribble.

[MN BB Ref]

I'm with you MN3SR!! What do you call though...the "T" or make it an OOB call even though its clearly not? Calling the "T" does seem harsh but it is the correct call is it not?

Dave

[BayStateRef]

Check out the Note under Rule 9-3.
"The dribbler has committed a violation if he/she steps on or outside a boundary even though he/she is not touching the ball while he/she is out of bounds."

This is not a close call. The girl, while dribbling, stepped out of bounds. That is an OOB violation. It does not matter if she was touching the ball at the time.

[ChuckElias]

Hey!! Another Massachusetts guy!! Where you from? I'm near Springfield. There's another guy, Marty, who is closer to Boston. IF you don't want to attract stalkers, you can always email me if you want to say hi! Welcome to the board!

Chuck

[Dan_ref]

Great, just what we all need, more Red Sox fans.

[rocketpast]

As a former player, current youth coach and varsity official - you have to give the defense a call in this situation. Either OOB or PC.

Coaches teach defensive players to cut off baseline & sideline. The defensive player was doing this. I'm sorry, one foot is not a 'reasonable gap' for a player to avoid contact. The defensive player does not have to be plowed over for a PC call to be made.

Second, this is a Middle School game. If a player at this level gets him/herself into good defensive position, then they must be rewarded with a call if contact is made. Most kids at this age do not know how to 'take a charge' properly by flopping to the ground. Give the girl the call!!

Some posts referred to 'displacement' of the defensive player. What happens when a 125 pound sophomore guard drives the lane and a 280 pound senior football player in shorts gets position? The little guy goes flying & the big guy doesn't flinch. Most officials (not all) call the foul against the defender because he was not 'displaced' or have nothing. This is what frustrates big guys. They then realize they won't get a call so next time they just pummel the kid. Your game just went into the crapper because you did not reward the defense for good play.

I could go on & on about how most officials do not reward good defensive play and how that comes back to ruin their game. However, I'll stop. And, 'yes', the rule book does support you calling a PC foul in the original situation.

[MN 3 Sport Ref]

Originally posted by BayStateRef
Check out the Note under Rule 9-3.
"The dribbler has committed a violation if he/she steps on or outside a boundary even though he/she is not touching the ball while he/she is out of bounds."

This is not a close call. The girl, while dribbling, stepped out of bounds. That is an OOB violation. It does not matter if she was touching the ball at the time.

It is amazing what one can acomplish when you quit being lazy and walk 5 minutes to your car and retrieve your rule book.

Like stated above 9-3 states the dribbler is OOB even though she was not touching the ball when she went OOB. This would become obvious when he/she continues the dribble on the other side of the defender. For those not satisfied, one could also call a double dribble via 9-5 as the player dribbled , passed/fumbled the ball by the defender and then started a new dribble.

This really wasn't that tough of a sitch. Work must be frying my brain today....

[RecRef]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
None of us here, except Sven, saw the play in question. So perhaps we are each seeing a differing degree of contact. With that in mind, this is probably my last two cents on the subject.

In the very first post of the thread, Sven has told us that the defender was not displaced, and that the dribbler was able to go around the defender. Since the defender was not displaced, the probability that I'm going to call a PC here is next to nil. The defender has not been hindered from performing any further normal defensive maneuvers. She's still standing exactly where she was. So I see no way that you could call the contact illegal. Therefore, no PC.

Because the defender legally placed herself directly in the dribbler's path, the dribbler was forced to go around. She was able to do this; although the slight contact with the defender caused her to step OOB. (I refuse to even discuss a T for being OOB here! ) But since the defender was there legally (we stipulated that earlier in the thread), this cannot be a blocking foul. The dribbler was able to keep the ball inbounds and was able to return her feet inbounds before touching the ball again. So no OOB call -- unless you judge that she continued her dribble when she stepped OOB.

So what do we have? No way I'm calling a PC without displacement in this situation. Even less chance of calling a blocking foul. The ball never went OOB. What we have is great defense and a very athletic point guard. No call.

Chuck

I hope it is not your last 2 cents. Please read what Sven said:
"B1 was not located directly on the sideline; [B}there was perhaps a foot of space between B1 and the boundary. It was through this gap that A1 dribbled when the contact occurred."[/B]

So in your eyes it is OK to force ones way through a "1 Foot" space, cause the contact which forces one OOB and not call a PC? If it is OK for you, so be it but it is not OK for me.