Faking Being Fouled
 

<iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/6KR1qzj-3kI" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="345" width="560"></iframe>

We don't know the full story behind this game...for all we known a warning may have been given earlier...but is this the type of play we want to get the T for? Perhaps the FIBA wording makes for a slightly different enforcement on the play?

This is a bang bang play. Did the defense act a little? Yes IMO. But was there contact by the offensive players right arm? I believe so. Bang bang play like this I wouldn't be shocked if I was going the other way with the call.

But I would tag a foul on the defense if he had a history in this particular game of "acting".

The defender was trying to get an Oscar award...that's a no call in my book everyday of the week. The offensive player stops well short of any kind of contact that would send the defender to the floor...I think the ballhandler does a good job of not going to and through the defender. The simple fact that he has his forearm out and there's contact doesn't make it an offensive foul.

Regardless of the "acting" performance, this is simply a BLOCK because the defender did not establish Legal Guarding Position before he got into the path of the dribbler (and caused the contact).

I seriously hope that you don't believe that there was no LGP. There certainly was. It was established almost immediately after the offensive player caught the pass. Shortly thereafter the defender did exactly what is in red. One can see this as early as four seconds into the video.

The only point for debate is how much contact there was and how much acting.

I dont know FIBA rules, so I cant comment on the T.

But the play itself made for a tough call for the slot, its definitely a bang-bang play!
LGP established... A1s arm is out but not extended... defender goes hollywood upon minor contact...

The most positive thing about this play is the calling officials position adjustment! WOW thats a great example of energetic movement with a purpose! Although a look from the topside (T) is the A look for this play, the step down put him in a GREAT place to referee the matchup. I wonder what the call would've been minus the T?

B maintained LGP.

Working lots of FIBA games, my understanding is that FIBA discourages faking being fouled moreso that Fed does.

I think the T is a good call. If there was a no-call on this one, I'm ok with that as well. This sort of play draws the line, that's for sure.

If not a charge, im calling a block on this "actor". I don't see a no-call here. I rather call a block then a tech under NFHS for this situation.

For the no-caller's, why a no-call?

A block is a cop-out. You're not going to discourage flopping unless you call the T.

Mind you, you have to be positive you saw a flop in order to call it. That said, if we're so comfortable with T-ing up players for unsportsmanlike conduct, why are we so uncomfortable with the T for faking fouls? Isn't faking unsportsmanlike?

Tell me what the defender did wrong by rule to get a blocking foul on the play.

I said a no-call because the contact was marginal helped by the fact that the defender was trying his giving his best Oscar performance on the play and didn't rise to the level of illegal contact.

A "block" is the call that some people call to send a message without calling the T. Calling nothing could, in some games, lead to problems.

I know the call...but usually that involves both players going to the floor if one goes that route. If the offensive player isn't affected at all, why put air in the whistle? On this play, the offensive player's defender is on the floor because he's taken himself out of the play

Usually. But he can do it only 4 more times. Which only once if a tech is given already. I like to use it if in any way I can say the offensive player's speed, rhythm, and balance was affected by the flop. It sends a message to the flopper to knock it off.

Now that I think about it, it's the only situation where it's ever been suggested to me to go with the "block" because it's a potential safety issue.

On this play, why have a whistle? The defender is legal after all...this isn't an RSBQ play to me...first of all, the ball handler was already trying to stop short of the defender before the defender tried going Hollywood. If the defender wouldn't have fell to the floor, we're not even discussing this play. By putting air in the whistle, you've penalized a defender that technically did nothing wrong.

I'm not a call the block b/c of safety official, My point is to send a message about trying to deceive an official to call a foul. That's not welcome in the game and will never be. On this particular play I'm still stuck on a charge. The only reason I mentioned block was the acting part of the defender was brought up.