Verticality

[firstyearref]

Hey guys,

As I sit here and watch the NCAA confrence playoffs, and remember those things coaches and player have yelled at me (no, i've never changed a call for them, relax), it leads me to just put this question to the crew that knows better.

I understand the concept of verticality, but it seems that many veteran refs still call fouls against those defenders that are standing with their hands straight up in the air, not moving, but the shooter moves his arms to make conact. So what is the call? No call? Foul on our poor helpless defender?

Nathan

[Blackhawk357]

The first key is to referee the defense. Most (or all) spectators are watching the offense so what they think is a stationary defender may not be. He has to first establish a legal guarding position (both feet on the floor w/in 6 feet). If he is switching onto a driving offensive player, the requirement is much tougher (establish) than if he has been defending that player before the drive (maintain).

If the defender has established a legal guarding position, he is entitled to that position and everything above that position, and may move to maintain that position. He is not entitled to 2 ft. in front of him where his arms are extended (even if his feet don't move). Neither is he entitled to bring one arm down across the shooter's arm and bring it back up.

Now, if the defender has a legal position, contact becomes the responsibility of the offensive player. It can either be a charge (if the defender is put at a disadvantage) or nothing (if he is not).

Hope this helps a little, I'm sure that others will jump on it if there's a mistake

Blackhawk

[canuckrefguy]

This very issue was brought up in an NCAA Officiating Bulletin earlier this year; too many calls going against vertical, stationary defenders who merely had shooters' hands/arms flying into them.

I doubt the average fan, and even most coaches, will ever buy into the verticality principle. If they see contact against their player, it must be a foul. Just another misconception we have to manage.

BH had it nailed pretty good....ask yourself "is the defender in a legal guarding position", and "who initiated the contact"...and go from there.

And like I always say....

[firstyearref]

Originally posted by canuckrefguy

I doubt the average fan, and even most coaches, will ever buy into the verticality principle. If they see contact against their player, it must be a foul. Just another misconception we have to manage.

No kidding!

Thanks BH and CRG

[Hawks Coach]

I think that the average coach, and many fans, buy into the verticality principle, just like they buy into anything else - when it favors their team. I can't tell you how many times I have seen the coach of the defense stand stiff as a board and hold both hands straight over their head when a foul call goes against their post player. We know the rule,and we coach to that rule. And the players know the rule too, because they make themselves as straight as possible after the contact, to show the ref that they were vertical (even if they initially brought an arm down hard onto the shooter's head ).

The issue isn't buying into a principle,but rather, seeing the game with unbiased eyes. Not gonna happen,with this or any other rule/call.

[mick]

Originally posted by firstyearref

As I sit here and watch the NCAA confrence playoffs....

I understand the concept of verticality, but it seems that many veteran refs still call fouls against those defenders that are standing with their hands straight up in the air, not moving, but the shooter moves his arms to make conact. So what is the call? No call? Foul on our poor helpless defender?

Nathan

Nathan,
Many players have mastered the vertical upper body, which everyone can see, while the player takes a step or 1/2-step into the legs or body of a shooter. So, even though everything "looks good" near the ball, the torso and lower body, which is hidden to TV audiences, may be violating.
mick

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Blackhawk357
He has to first establish a legal guarding position (both feet on the floor w/in 6 feet). If he is switching onto a driving offensive player, the requirement is much tougher (establish) than if he has been defending that player before the drive (maintain).

Blackhawk, I'm not sure what your rationale is for this last sentence. It seems to me that the requirements are exactly the same for any defender, whether he is the primary or secondary defender on the ballhandler (assuming Fed or NCAA men's rules). If you're defending the ballhandler, then the only requirement is that you beat him/her to the spot. There is no "time or distance" requirement when defending the ballhandler. So whether you're the primary defender, trying to prevent the drive, or you're the secondary defender, jumping in at the last second, the requirement is the same. Get there first. Then the contact is the responsibility of the ballhandler.

Were you trying to make a different point?

In any case, your main point is correct. This is exactly why we must officiate the defense. If you don't see the defender until contact occurs, then it always looks as though the ballhandler got there first.

If the defender has established a legal guarding position, he is entitled to that position and everything above that position, and may move to maintain that position.

Every player is entitled to the area above his spot on the floor, whether or not he has legal guarding position, provided he got to that spot legally. If a guy is just standing there, but is not facing the ballhandler, then he does not have LGP. But that doesn't mean that the ballhandler can then run up his back and push him down from behind. The dribbler still has responsibility for the contact in that situation.

Chuck

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Blackhawk357
He has to first establish a legal guarding position (both feet on the floor w/in 6 feet).

...
Now, if the defender has a legal position, contact becomes the responsibility of the offensive player. It can either be a charge (if the defender is put at a disadvantage) or nothing (if he is not).

Hope this helps a little, I'm sure that others will jump on it if there's a mistake

Blackhawk

Legal guarding position is established by having both feet on the floor and facing the opponent. No distance requirement - distance is a factor in closely guarded situations. Anyway it's relevant to torso-to-torso contact with the ball carrier, not to verticality.

[RecRef]

Originally posted by Blackhawk357
The first key is to referee the defense. Most (or all) spectators are watching the offense so what they think is a stationary defender may not be. He has to first establish a legal guarding position (both feet on the floor w/in 6 feet).
Blackhawk

I know that Chuck has posted on this but I do have to add that there is nothing in the rules that say anything about Lehal Guarding Position (LGP) and 6ft. LGP is a consept that gives the defense extra protection under the rules. If he/she has obtained LGP than there should be no question as to fault.

[mick]

Originally posted by Blackhawk357
...He has to first establish a legal guarding position (both feet on the floor w/in 6 feet). ....
Blackhawk

Of course the 6' rule applies only to "closely guarded" and not to legal guarding position beyond 6'.

[Blackhawk357]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Blackhawk, I'm not sure what your rationale is for this last sentence. It seems to me that the requirements are exactly the same for any defender, whether he is the primary or secondary defender on the ballhandler (assuming Fed or NCAA men's rules). If you're defending the ballhandler, then the only requirement is that you beat him/her to the spot.

Chuck

Chuck,

My point here was that you must first establish a legal guarding position, which requires that you have both feet on the floor. If you had already established that position there is no requirement to have your feet on the floor to maintain that position.

So if you are switching on to a new player, and you are sliding your feet when the contact occurs (prior to the establishment of the initial guarding position) it's a block. If you are in the same position AFTER initially establishing that LGP, it's a charge. As I understand the rule.

Dan_ref and RecRef ~ As for the 6 ft requirement, that is for closely guarded rule, my bad. (insert blush icon here) That's what I get for trying to do this "stuff" after my bedtime

Blackhawk

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Blackhawk357


My point here was that you must first establish a legal guarding position, which requires that you have both feet on the floor. If you had already established that position there is no requirement to have your feet on the floor to maintain that position.

So if you are switching on to a new player, and you are sliding your feet when the contact occurs (prior to the establishment of the initial guarding position) it's a block. If you are in the same position AFTER initially establishing that LGP, it's a charge. As I understand the rule.

I'm sorry but this is not the way it works with respect to verticality - maybe that's your point, that while a player is maintaining verticality the foul is actually a blocking foul? Because the defender is moving into the shooter? But then I thought the original post said something like the defender is standing still. I'm confused

Dan_ref and RecRef ~ As for the 6 ft requirement, that is for closely guarded rule, my bad. (insert blush icon here) That's what I get for trying to do this "stuff" after my bedtime

Blackhawk

No problem, we've all had our share of mis-statements, too broad generalizations and assorted screw-ups!

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by mick
Many players have mastered the vertical upper body, which everyone can see, while the player takes a step or 1/2-step into the legs or body of a shooter. So, even though everything "looks good" near the ball, the torso and lower body, which is hidden to TV audiences, may be violating.
mick

I agree with mick. Many times, coaches and fans don't see and players don't realize that they've taken a step toward the shooter or flicked a wrist and fouled.

canuckref's signature is also correct in that many officials anticipate a foul in this situation, and blow the whistle, only to realize to late that it wasn't a foul.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

canuckref's signature is also correct in that many officials anticipate a foul in this situation, and blow the whistle, only to realize to late that it wasn't a foul.

I think that's our answer most of the time.

[mick]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
....
canuckref's signature is also correct in that many officials anticipate a foul in this situation, and blow the whistle, only to realize to late that it wasn't a foul.

Last night I was watching the regional final (winner goes to quarter-final).

A1 drove toward the lane, picked up his dribble, had a big, extended-arm fake to his right, took his last step and then brought the ball back in to elevate and shoot a "runner" as Lead official blew the play dead and singalled a travel. Right after the whistle ended, A1, in continuous motion, put the ball in the hole.

Lead then choked on his Fox and realizing what he had done, and counted the basket. Then, Lead realized what he did with that and cancelled the basket.
....Lead ended up explaining stuff to both coaches separately and the game was continued on the end line at point of interuption.

It's hard to work this game with our hands around our own throats.