One Last Play
 

One last play:

<iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/KuSQFv-V2l8" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="345" width="560"></iframe>

First of all, I believe this play is a blocking foul as I have the defender moving forward at the time of contact thus no LGP.

I think on the play, the administering official guessed on the play and was too focused on the thrower...especially seeing as the thrower wasn't being pressured. Even if he was, I was always thought you have to officiate the play around you on the throw-in and not focus solely on the thrower. Perhaps the official could have also been deeper towards the backcourt before he bounced the ball?

Also, with the new rule changes in NF, this is a perfect example of a team control foul.

Obvious charging foul. Inexperienced official. You note that he is not looking at the right action. He says, "player control" foul. The guy doesn't ever have the ball during the entire play. He give the PC signal, not the push/charge.

Lastly, the officials fail to switch following the foul. Even after the second foul near the end of the clip, it appears that they may not switch. The newish guy is simply standing there at T.

Can't say I agree with your assessment of a charging call...I have the defender moving forward thus losing legal guarding position. Even if the defender stops momentarily before contact, I'd say the defender needs to re obtain LGP by getting two feet on the floor, torso facing the defender, and in this case, would have to give the proper time and distance for a moving player w/o the ball.

As far as the mechanics, not every place follows NF mechanics. I know in this situation, where I've worked, we only switch on shooting fouls in two person, no switching on offensive fouls, and no long switches.

Finally, the official in question was in his first year in the video.

I have to agree with the the offensive foul on this play. The defender is maintaining his position on the offensive player who is retreating. He is entitled to his spot on the floor, provided he obtained it legally, which he does. Offensive player suddenly decides to change his direction and goes to and through a legally established defender.

One last play?? Whats up with that... keep em coming APG!

Those that say charge, I ask you to look at the left hand of the defender at the :15 mark, he clearly impedes the offensive players forward progress prior to the crash. IMO that is the first foul.

I would've liked to see the T get behind that matchup before administering the throw-in. But to be honest he was so locked in on the the non-guarded thrower, I dont think depth could have helped here. Maybe the thrower was a known violator in those parts :D

Well, theres an old saying about elephants and ants when deciding fouls. If someone has to look on film and tell me look at this particular second of the play to find some little contact with a hand, that doesn't even rise to ant size for me. It may even go down to flea size ;) I would stay away from "yeah but look at this" on reviewing a play. The decision to be made on this play is not about that hand, it's the b/c, no need to over analyze it.

Just my thoughts partner!

From the comfort of my computer, I looked at the play several times so I can see why some would say offensive. At the time of the play, and assuming I was watching the players from the beginning, I probably would have called a block.

For those who say they wish he would have got behind the play before inbounding the ball: how far would you like him to go? He isn't especially close to the inbounder and at some point he has to open up as opposed to moving back - he could end up "bouncing" the ball from 20 feet away otherwise.

Ok, if impedes away from the ball are mere fleas to you, so be it.

If we are allowing A1 to play through it (as he is the intended receiver) I got a block... either way its "staying here."

I like to be a few steps behind the deepest in bounds matchup (when possible). I understand about opening up to the court, but I also want to put myself in the best position possible to see plays like this in its entirety & also to referee the quck steal. I've found that positioning myself to be one play ahead of the throw-in results in getting unexpected plays correct.
IMO if a steal occured in this play the T (new L) is already beat.

For a first year official, I think this guy did quite well.

The learning points are:

• when there is no pressure on the thrower-in, focus more on the action in-bounds, and only observe the TI with your peripheral vision
• with the in-bounds action deeper than the TI, the administering official should be further away from the TI
• for a foul against Team A, it is a charging foul, with the appropriate signal

As for the decision on the call, I believe it is very close. I have a block for the same reason APG mentioned. However, the action is so very close to a charge that if they were consistently called a charge throughout the game, I wouldn't say too much.

[QUOTE=tref;784651]Ok, if impedes away from the ball are mere fleas to you, so be it.[QUOTE]

Clear cut impedes, you bet, get 'em everytime...but, this particular play, if you're going to deem that illegal contact, then you are going to have a foul on every single play and every single throwin all night long. I never said don't allow freedom of movement, what I say is, this simply isn't enough to put a whistle on.

Yeah, you're right! I stopped the frame-by-frame & went back to the entire play & that left hand piece is a small part of the big picture... block.

Going to have to go with a push on the offensive player as well. There is contact by the defender, but not enough IMO to create a disadvantage.

Yes, it would have been nice for the ref to have been looking at the players instead of the thrower-in and yes, it would have been nice for him to give the correct signal ... but I believe in the end the right player was penalized.

I have a block.

1. As some stated, the defender is moving into the offensive player.

2. The offensive player does not have the ball so now time and distance apply similar to a screen. This is similar to blocking a cutter, you can't just jump in front of a cutter and expect an offensive foul when he runs you over. He needs time and distance.

The problem with how he went about getting the call is he guessed on the play...you can tell because the official turns his head when he sees bodies on the floor and hesitates before making a call.

+1

Understood, got it, I agree. Now, how far would you go with this? To me, this is one of those "It depends" situations (not the adult diapers either). Yes, it is a good idea to be behind the deepest players, but are you going to "bounce" the ball 20 feet from the inbounder?

I don't have any set distance, but there is a point where I will open up instead of moving back. I don't think the official in the video is too far from where he should be. I could tell he was relatively inexperienced when watching the video, but he is doing OK for someone in their first year.

This is an impede on the defense in my opinion. Onus to be legal is on the defense. The off. fakes backward forcing the def. to come forward, now off. tries to go by and gets checked up by the shoulder of the defense. good play.

You're right.. it all depends. Just like any other positioning, I believe we have to have a feel for when to open up vs. stepping back when different throw-in situations arise.

Yeah the new guy isnt afraid to blow, gotta give him credit for putting a whistle on it!

Block. Moving forward.

Well there are a couple of different ways to look at this (imo)

1 - If I'm the official in that situation and have not been looking at the play and suddenly this happens. I would like to think i'ld swallow my whistle (and my pride) on a play where I would be guessing based on the result. So in that exact situation as that guy (no call).

2 - Seeing the play the way it developed. I'm probably going to go push on the offense or maybe even double foul. My feeling based on what I'm seeing on camera is the offense isn't trying to get by the defense but rather crashing into defense trying to cause excessive contact and make a non-basketball play. Just as I'm seeing it. Either way I'm going to have a short convo with both after the call about playing basketball and not tag with each other.

:rolleyes: Come on!!!!!

Why is there a need to talk to anyone after this?:confused: This is just a regular basketball play...opponents do run into each other every now and then. I don't even know how you come up with a double foul...that seems like you're making a cop-out because you don't want to make the tough call.

Sorry, a no call is just not an option in this situation.....collision and both bodies go down. You have to take what you know and make a decision. Even if you're not 100%, there needs to be a call. You'd look far worse doing nothing here with the play right in your lap than getting a close call wrong.

The offense isn't required to avoid a defender who doesn't have legal position. It is the defenders responsibility to legally get in the path and maintain a legal position. If they don't, they have no protection in such collisions.

No convo needed. Defender got beat and committed a foul.

I see what you are saying. My gut says in most games I'm calling push/charge on the offense.

Trying to look at the game as a whole (which is tough with only the clip):
- You've got what appears to be a low level game based on age and size of players
- You've got a low skill game based on lack of footwork to get open and the catch and shoot mechanics of the player they choose to feed the ball to later in the clip.
- You've got an offensive and defensive player who will be seeing each other on a number of inbounds who's immediate responses seem to be to clutch and grab and then crash into the clutcher and grabber.

Probably too much analysis and inference here but seems like the sort of game where you may need to do managing to make sure things stay clean and kids are focused on playing the game/ may not understand rules. This is the only situation and reason I would think double foul and talk. Clean this up if it is constant on inbounds all game long based on just the clip.

My quick thoughts
 

I watched the video once and a few things that I saw, and take this from a first year official as well:

I'm not sure what the referee was looking at, he isn't involved in the play at all, the player throwing the ball in-bounds isn't part of any action area. And any step over the boundary plane you can clearly see out of your peripheral vision. So as a first year referee, I would think we would more likely miss a player crossing the boundary plane because we were so intent on the two action players. Instead this referee chooses to watch the non action area.

I'm okay with either call, block or charge as this is a bang bang type of play. Personally I'm going with the offensive call. I didn't like the way he reported it. I only watched it once to give initial insight, but I believe he reported the wrong number. Also I didn't like his communication with his partner.

Lastly, I didn't like the jumper by the big kid, wow that shot was ugly :eek:

We can agree to disagree assuming I don't see the play I can't call things I don't see. SHould their be a call here definitely. But if I don't see a travel, foul or any other call in the course of a game I not calling to call it on the notion it looks bad if I don't call something here. If questioned I would readily admit that it was suppose to be my call and I missed it.



The offense isn't required to avoid a defender who doesn't have legal position. It is the defenders responsibility to legally get in the path and maintain a legal position. If they don't, they have no protection in such collisions.

The offense is not required to avoid the defender ever legal position or no. They also don't have to run over anyone whether they are a defender, screener, hapless lost player on the court or teammate. We just need to determine who was responsible for contact, who was advantaged or disadvantaged by a particular play, etc.

I'm not convinced based on the situation I see in the video that player on offense is making a legitmate move to get open or run to a spot as much as they are running into the defense simply to create a contact situation. My point is only that in the context of each game this play may be different (level of play, previous acts, etc) so I could see making each of the calls I mentioned in different situations.

In the end I'm certainly not punishing a defender if offense is clearly not trying to go by or get the ball but rather just run them over through their chest.

I don't think without the context of the game I can say for sure whether a convo is needed or not. Tnough we could say that for any clip, so you are right in that is probably isn't worth mentioning here.

You're exactly right! At this level many of it participants do not understand the rules & it is not our jobs to teach them the rules. I've learned that putting air in the whistle is better than s l o w i n g the game down to talk to kids on basic plays. IMO, there was nothing non-basketball about this play & doesn't require an official to discuss anything with the kids.
We cannot make sure things are "clean" & we are not required to keep the kids "focused" on anything. We penalize illegal acts AFTER they occur...

I understand not guessing based on how a travel looks but using clues to make a decision when we cant see obvious fouls is not a bad thing.
I think we all have that little voice inside of us...

Again, I didnt see anything non-basketball.