Newbies - try this one
 

This came up in a summer HS girls tournament I worked a few weeks ago. FED rules. A1 takes a shot. While the ball is still in the air, A1 lands (so A1 is no longer an airborne shooter) then fouls B1. The shot then goes in. What's the call as it pertains to the shot going in? Does the basket count?

I'm going to guess:

Basket counts, report foul as normal, no team control so bonus as needed.

Was it some kind of blocking out foul? So far this summer I've seen these called very inconsistently. A textbook block out, with no displacement but arms back gets called, but then in another game, block outs with about SIX FEET of displacement, no call.

Same official?

For the record, during box outs I've seen players "hold" or impede their opponents freedom of movement without displacement, while the arms are back pinning/locking the would-be rebounder.

Those are generally reported as a hold though.

No, it was a push. OK, now add this to it. Same play, after A1 lands and fouls B1 (called) and before the ball goes in the basket, the horn sounds ending the quarter.

BTW - I'm not admitting you were right in your answer.

Some camps teach "Possession Consequence" with regards to rebounding fouls. It is basically a different way to say advantage/disadvantage but may clarify what constitutes an advantage/disadvantage for some.

If the team/player that should get the ball did get the ball, ignore the contact as it had no effect on the play. This doesn't mean ignore contact that put a player on his back. It is talking about simple jockeying, holding, or excessive boxing out when the ball goes somewhere else or when a player from behind jumps into the front player who still gets the ball cleanly and is unaffected by the contact.

I have heard Cameron's point as well but I tend to disagree with that philosophy on a HTBT case by case situation. Often minor displacement that does not affect the play can and should be ignored but a major push should be called, in my opinion, no matter where the ball goes and it is best to get it early in the game. This can prevent huge headaches later in the game. Also, when you let A1 give a huge box out displacement to B1, what happens when B1 now realizes what the 'rule' is based on the no call and clears out A1 on the other end?

I do think each case is HTBT but calling obvious fouls can rarely be a bad thing. Players adjust to how the game is being called and I would rather have them adjust and play cleaner than adjust and play dirtier.

Every call and non call affects the game at that point and in the future. Players adjust based on what is being called and their own personal foul situation.

Why do you think this constitutes disagreement with Camron? It's the substance of what he's saying, expressed less clearly.

mbyron - I am not sure if I am disagreeing with Cameron, but I am expanding on his point. There is a wide discrepancy on the advantage/disadvantage philosophy and I am in the camp where I try to be aware of what is okay and not okay and I lean toward calling fouls instead of the 'playing through' but all situations are HTBT. I have seen others and myself as well allow contact and 'play through' situations where I later regretted not calling a foul. This has gone both ways too where I called fouls I should have let go but the consequences of not calling the foul are normally more severe than the consequences of calling the foul when this mistake is made.

The point I am trying to make is that too often refs do not make calls that should be made using the excuse of advantage/disadvantage.

Also, I have been in camps where I was told after calling a foul that a major clear out with two post players should not be called because the rebound went the other way, so I changed. From experience I learned that this can come back to bite you later in the game. For me it was a flagrant elbow at the end of the game by the player I allowed to clear out earlier. I no longer allow that behavior. One of the few pieces of advice at camp I am unhappy with.

It's part of the learning process, but "advantage/disadvantage" is all but written into the rules in the definition of a foul.
Learning which contact is a foul, and which contact is incidental is part of learning how to officiate.

When A1 gets slapped on the arm as he blows by B1, and he's about to get an easy layup anyway, there's no foul.

A much lighter slap on the arm would be a foul, however, if it occurred during the shooting motion and actually affected the shot.

1) I'm confused. You called the foul (and were told afterwards to let it go), and still got the elbow. So, how do you know not calling the foul makes it worse?

2) You can (try to) address it in other ways -- talk to the players, be more vigilant about lesser contact that does affect the play, etc.

1) I think the flagrant occurred in a game in which he did not call the foul.

2) Agreed. And in some games, you'll need to get contact that should be let go in most games. Also part of the learning curve.

{No more half-truths... No more half-truths... No more half-truths} :D

I've been taught that there are 2 instances when we put a whistle on rebounding contact. In addition to what Camron states, "Clean Up" is the other. And thats the category your scenarios fall under.


Excellent points Snaqs, that's the "Art" of what we do!

The key to what is & what isnt a foul (drives to the bucket & rebounding) is a patient whistle. Once we acquire one of those, what a work of art we can make.

+1

Not quite enough for an And1 but if the contact makes him miss I'll come back & get it... Ahhhh nevermind, he should've made that one regardless. ;)

Sorry Bob, to clarify...

The first incident occurred at an instructional camp where I was reffing and there were observers. I called a foul on a clear out on the rebound and the observer thought I should have let it go because the rebound went the other way and it did not affect the play.

The second incident occurred much later in a different game. It was a High School Boys JV and there was a clear out and the rebound went the other way so it did not affect the play and I did not call the foul. At the very end of the game the player who was the culprit flagrantly fouled an opponent with an elbow to the head.

I am not Bob, but I play one on the internet...

Sounds like clean up to me! But do you give them a stern "EASY" or "STRAIGHT" as the boxing out begins to escalate??

Many people say "talk to the players" but its all about the tone as well.

And you have no idea whether he would have gotten stupid even if you'd called the clear out. That's on him, not you.

I had a knucklehead in a FB game a few years back. I stuck him with an intentional in the first half; my partner stuck him with a flagrant in the second half. You can't fix stupid, and sometimes you can't even hide it.

Count the basket. B1 will shoot Free Throws if Team B is in the bonus. Start the next quarter or half with an AP Throw-in.:D

possibly, but you should take one or two steps first. What are they?

Left foot and right foot?

Sounds like a travel (or, possibly, a crab dribble). :D

Consult Your Local "Travel" Agent
 

Wouldn't that be a violation for "steps" or "walking"?

OK.... what am I missing? A1 shoots. A1 lands. A1 fouls B1. Horn sounds, Ball goes in the basket.:confused:

I think we're all wondering what he is thinking about. Sounded like you had it to me.

1. Whack Team Bs coach for going nuts because we counted the bucket on a p/c foul.

2. Whack Team As coach for going nuts because we awarded FTs on a p/c foul.

:D

Only that I would check with my partner(s) before declaring the quarter over.

Well, in that case, you better check with them to see if the shooter was in front of or behind the line, whether the ball actually went in, if the players were all in the book, and if the defender's headband was the right color! :D

Officials don't declare quarters over. Quarters end per the rules. They are over whenever they are over and not until then. ;)

"Determine" then. :rolleyes:

Camron, are you saying that if there's a discernable lag between the whistle and the horn that you wouldn't check with your partners to make sure no one saw how much time was on the clock?

It would definitely be part of my discussion.

I didn't read the situation to mean that the clock continued to run after the whistle until it expired and the horn sounded.. If the whistle blew and the horn sounded clearly after the whistle, I'd attempt to figure out how much time to restore if I didn't already know it.