7'5" — Tallest HS Player in the World — Mamadou Ndiaye

[rwest]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

You just said he had the ball and was displaced. Yet it's a no-call???? Disagree.

Two hands on the ball-handler is a foul. Period. This is an "absolute" at the college level (for men, anyway). It's a good -- and EASY, I might add -- way to quickly clean up a game. Add the displacement (away from the basket, no less!) and it's a foul at any level, IMHO.

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

You just said he had the ball and was displaced. Yet it's a no-call???? Disagree.

Two hands on the ball-handler is a foul. Period. This is an "absolute" at the college level (for men, anyway). It's a good -- and EASY, I might add -- way to quickly clean up a game. Add the displacement (away from the basket, no less!) and it's a foul at any level, IMHO.

Whats the definition of "incidental contact"? Contact that had no bearing on the play. Did he lose the ball? No. Did he lose his balance? Not really. He was already off balance because he had to reach for the ball. Did he lose his rhythm? No. Was his speed affected (or is that effected?)? No. Was his direction changed? No. So speed, rhythm, balance, direction where not effected. What was the outcome of the play? An easy bucket. No foul. I too have been taught "two of anything" on the player with the ball is a foul. One hand + one knee. Foul. Two hands = Foul. However, this goes against the fundamental principles of basketball. Incidental contact should not be penalized. Two hands on the back of the player with the ball can be incidental contact. The "two of anything" philosophy is just that. A philosophy of some officials. Maybe a great many officials. I don't know. I know some officials who agree with this. I don't but if my assignor wants me to call it...when in Rome. But it's not supported by the concept of "incidental contact", which is clearly outlined in the Fed Rule Book.

There is also the "Tower Philosophy" which can be stated in the following manner.

"If they are unfairly affected as a result of an infraction of the rules,
then the one not in compliance must be penalized. If there has been
no appreciable effect upon the progress of the game, then the game
shall not be interrupted. The action should be ignored. Is this contact
incidental and not vital?"

Does not the above description describe this play? I think so. So we will just have to disagree. I think this is a good no call.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by rwest

Does not the above description describe this play? I think so. So we will just have to disagree. I think this is a good no call.

You're right, we'll just disagree. I think being pushed away from the basket while you are holding (or about to catch) the ball is not incidental.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

There was probably not a foul on the shot, but there was a definite foul prior to that on the catch. The defender has 2 hands in his back pushing him forward away from the basket while he has the ball. That is an "absolute", IMHO.

So I'm assuming (to be generous to the official) THAT's the foul that was called.

By the book and per NFHS POEs, 100% correct.
(Note: the timing of the official in the video is very poor.)

Originally Posted by rwest

Whats the definition of "incidental contact"? Contact that had no bearing on the play.

Not correct.

Incidental contact is contact with an opponent which is permitted and which
does not constitute a foul.

ART. 1 . . .

The mere fact that contact occurs does not constitute a foul. When
10 players are moving rapidly in a limited area, some contact is certain to occur.

ART. 2 . . .

Contact, which may result when opponents are in equally favorable
positions to perform normal defensive or offensive movements, should not be
considered illegal, even though the contact may be severe.

ART. 3 . . .

Similarly, contact which does not hinder the opponent from
participating in normal defensive or offensive movements should be considered

incidental.


The incidental contact rule does not instruct officials to ignore illegal contact which is defined elsewhere in the rules book as a foul.
Scrapper correctly states that the defender pushed the offensive player with two hands in the back as he was airborne and receiving the ball. You even state that there was displacement.
POE #2 for this season reiterates several of the NFHS directives on fouls.

2. GUIDELINES FOR TEACHING AND OFFICIATING.

The following guidelines are
excerpts from past NFHS Points of Emphasis. The committee believes sharing

these guidelines again will assist in game administration.

...

A. Handchecking/Body Fouls.
1)

Tactics using the hands, arms or body that permit any player (offense
or defense) to "control" (hold, impede, push, divert, slow or prevent)

the movement of an opposing player is a foul.
...
C. Post Play.
...

2)

The defense can assume a legal, vertical stance or position on the side,
front or behind the offensive post player. When the defense undercuts
(initiates lower-body non-vertical contact), slaps, pushes, holds,
elbows, forearms or just generally demonstrates rough, physical
movements or tactics, this is a foul on the defense and must be called
without warning.

3)

When a player pushes a leg or knee into the rear of an opponent, it is
a foul.

4)

When a player dislodges an opponent from an established position by
pushing or "backing in," it is a foul.

5) When a player uses hands, forearms or elbows to prevent an opponent from maintaining a legal position, it is a foul.



Furthermore, the offensive player and the defensive player are not in equally favorable positions, such as two opposing players running, jumping, or diving for a loose ball. Here one player has established a clear spot on the court and is receiving the ball without the opponent having a play for it. What is the action of the opponent? He pushes the offensive player away from his spot and to a greater distance from the basket.

Due to the vast difference in size and strength of the two players, it could be argued that despite the negatives that result to the offensive player's position from this contact, it still did not prevent him from executing his offensive move. Unfortunately, officiating cannot make allowances for illegal contact just because a superior athlete is still able to make the play despite the infraction. That is simple ignoring a foul.

The bottom line is that (in my opinion) you are incorrectly using the term incidental contact as justification to ignore a foul when a player makes a quality play despite the opponent doing something which is clearly stated to be illegal.