Storm vs. Liberty - Last Night

[NCHSAA]

Originally Posted by Andy

With the benefit of being able to watch the play several times, I have ball contact first, then body contact and no foul. The shooter was also jumping forward and that probably made it look a lot worse than it was.

I can also say that in real time, on the court, it would be awfully tough to swallow the whistle on that play.

The official, however, was in a great position to see the play.

I agree. Ball first on a block = nothing, unless severe contact by the body of the defender on the shooter

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Andy

I have ball contact first, then body contact.

Originally Posted by NCHSAA

Ball first on a block = nothing, unless severe contact by the body of the defender on the shooter

Here we go again.

[NCHSAA]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Here we go again.

What's your opinion Billy? Just curious.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by NCHSAA

What's your opinion Billy? Just curious.

A few months ago, Forum members became involved in a great debate as to whether, or not, a foul should be called when a shot is cleanly blocked, and then contact occurs with the airborne shooter. Some were adamant that a foul should not be called because the contact, if not excessive, did not affect the shooter because the shot was already cleanly blocked. Others were just as adamant that officials should protect the airborne shooter at all costs. As one who only officiates high school games, I fall into the "always protect the airborne shooter" category, but I am open to other opinions from those that officiate college games in "Rome".

[NCHSAA]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

A few months ago, Forum members became involved in a great debate as to whether, or not, a foul should be called when a shot is cleanly blocked, and then contact occurs with the airborne shooter. Some were adamant that a foul should not be called because the contact, if not excessive, did not affect the shooter because the shot was already cleanly blocked. Others were just as adamant that officials should protect the airborne shooter at all costs. As one who only officiates high school games, I fall into the "always protect the airborne shooter" category, but I am open to other opinions from those that officiate college games in "Rome".

I see. I learned early on through a college mentor of mine that while an offensive players best move is a dunk, a defenders is a block. If the contact is after the block and it is clean then where can that shot go? Usually no where. So if contact occurs marginally afterwards then why penalize a clean block by the defense?

I do recognize the other side of the argument. Though I believe we can protect them too much.

[Pantherdreams]

My personal feeling is block before contact is going to be a no call unless the contact after the block has happened is excessive or unnecessary. Tough to disadvantage a shooter when his/her shot is over and on the way to the floor.

I understand the need to protect the airborne shooter, but I'm not sure what the are being protected from. If they are being protected from a slap on the wrist or a bump they could easily absorb maybe they should be in a different sandbox with less contact: tennis, chess, swimming . . .

General rule of thumb if it is contact i would accept as inadvertant and able to be handled on the subway or line at the grocery store I don't need to protect kids from it.

If you want to protect the shooter I get that, just make sure you are protecting them not rewarding them for getting airborne. I also think a lot of this probably has to do with the nature of the basketball games you officiate. If you do a lot of games with larger athletes, where blocks &/ dunks are a regular occurrence and kids are used to playing this way you probably see less calls here as kids manage. The tough ones come in games where you've got 1 or 2 players who can make these sorts of plays but the rest of players strength, body control, game in general cannot handle this sort of play.

[JRutledge]

I got nothing on the block.

Peace

[Pantherdreams]

I don't have a foul on this call at any point. Ball has been blocked contact (imo) is not enough to send the player to the ground - force of block and sales job to get a foul did. The ball has been blocked, contact after that is not enough to disadvantage the the other player any further (particularly in this instance when the game is now over).

[NCHSAA]

As Panther has said himself/herself, I wouldn't have a call at any point in the game on this play. The defender blocked the shot, the shot was not getting off on this play, and the contact was after the block. Fair game.