The Call Most Often, or Most Egregiously, Missed

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
[/B]

Woody, completely out of the norm for you, you're simply telling me what you "think" and what your opinion is. You have yet to offer any rule reference to back up what you "think".
( [/B][/QUOTE]Tony,I still think that what we have here may be a failure to communicate.

I may be doing a poor job of trying to detail how I envision this play,but I think that,during a game,we would probably make the same call.That's jmo,too.

Interesting discussion,though.Lot of good points made by different posters,too.

[mikesears]

Originally posted by Ref in PA
For my rule, I cite 4-23-3.
"4-23-3 After the initial legal guarding position is obtained:
a. The guard is NOT required to have either or both feet on the floor or continue facing the opponent.
b. The guard may move laterally or obliquely to maintain position, provided it is not toward the opponent when contact occurs."

As a former basketball official, I found this discussion very interesting. I think what is quoted above supports Tony's position. Just my two cents on this.

[Camron Rust]

Just to really stir this up, what if we consider screening principles?

The offense may not cut off the path of a moving defender without giving time/distance.


I think it really boils down not to who jumped or who jumped first but the specifics of each case. Where was each player to start with? Which direction did they jump? Was the shooter's jump a "normal" offensive action.


I had another post that didn't seem to make it....retrying...

Originally posted by BktBallRef
So, you're saying that once a guard establishes a LGP, he never gives it up?

Why is there a difference in these two plays?

A1 is dribbling to the basket and B1, who has established LGP, now...

#1...runs in front of A1.

#2...jumps in front of A1.

10-6-3 Note specifically states:

If he/she jumps into position, both feet must return to the floor after the jump before he/she has obtained a guarding position.

If what you say is true, then a defender can never again be called for a blocking foul, if at anytime during the sequence he had LGP. And that's simply not true. Defenders establish LGP all the time and still illegally move into the path of a dribbler or shooter.

The difference, I think is whether B's jump is "obtaining" a postition or "maintaining" a position. If B has remained in front of A the entire time (no head/shoulders by), then it is certainly possible that B's lateral jump is with the constraints of LGP. However, it is also possible that the jump was because A1 beat B1 and B1 need to re-obtain a LGP.

That, I believe, is the crux of this situation.

There also exists casebook plays wherein the defense draws a PC foul even though the defender was not in LGP.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by mikesears

As a former basketball official, I found this discussion very interesting. I think what is quoted above supports Tony's position. Just my two cents on this.

At the end of the day, this is a jugment call. If the official was not refereeing the defense, he might not be completely aware of what happen and might only be guessing as to what the defender did. So all of us can quote all the rules, citations and wording, but the play might not be exactly as stated. If you have little or no judgment, it does not matter what the rulebook says if you are not refereeing the defense and watching solely the ball handler.

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by mikesears

As a former basketball official, I found this discussion very interesting. I think what is quoted above supports Tony's position. Just my two cents on this.

Mike,if the guard moves laterally or obliquely,but happens to be in the air when the shooter now initiates the contact with him/her,who are you gonna call the foul on? The guard?

[mikesears]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Mike,if the guard moves laterally or obliquely,but happens to be in the air when the shooter now initiates the contact with him/her,who are you gonna call the foul on? The guard?

I doubt I get back into calling basketball but this is what I envisioned in the original play.

A1 fakes a shot from the corner baseline. B1 bites on the fake and jumps out and towards A1. A1 takes a step in toward B1 and tries a jumpshot, B1 crashes into A1.

Foul on B1 in my opinion.

In your play, it's a tough call. Without answering your question , let me ask one (I honestly am swaying both ways with this one).

A1 takes a shot. B1 is somewhat out of position to get the rebound and jumps from the side of the basket to the middle of the basket. While B1 is airborn, A1 moves to the spot where B1 is going to land to pull down the rebound. B1 lands on A1. Who fouled?

Good question and good discussion.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by mikesears
A1 takes a shot. B1 is somewhat out of position to get the rebound and jumps from the side of the basket to the middle of the basket. While B1 is airborn, A1 moves to the spot where B1 is going to land to pull down the rebound. B1 lands on A1. Who fouled?

[/B]

I'd call the foul on A1.If A1 isn't in B1's path when B1 jumps for the rebound,I honestly can't think of any way that B1 should be responsible for any contact that might occur before he lands.It's just not reasonable to expect a player to have to change directions in mid-air when there wasn't anyone in front of them when they initially jumped.This is another play similar to the one that Joe was expounding on previously.The principle of a "legal guarding position" doesn't really have anything to do with this play.It's more about who is initiating the illegal contact.

Btw,I thought that Camron made some excellent points above,also.

[Ref in PA]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

I'd call the foul on A1.If A1 isn't in B1's path when B1 jumps for the rebound,I honestly can't think of any way that B1 should be responsible for any contact that might occur before he lands.It's just not reasonable to expect a player to have to change directions in mid-air when there wasn't anyone in front of them when they initially jumped.This is another play similar to the one that Joe was expounding on previously.The principle of a "legal guarding position" doesn't really have anything to do with this play.It's more about who is initiating the illegal contact.

Btw,I thought that Camron made some excellent points above,also. [/B]

If A1 is already in a path and B1 jumps to block the path but does not come down before the A1 gets to the point, foul on B1. However, if B1 jumps to a point, and A1 alters his path or initiates a new path to get to B1's landing point before B1 lands, I have a foul on A1. To say anything different would make it legal to undercut anyone at any time.

[Joe]

JR:

"The principle of a "legal guarding position" doesn't really have anything to do with this play.It's more about who is *initiating* the illegal contact."

Yes!

RiPA:

"However, if B1 jumps to a point, and A1 alters his path or initiates a new path to get to B1's landing point before B1 lands, I have a foul on A1. **To say anything different would make it legal to undercut anyone at any time.**"

YES!!! That's the point! Defenders could never jump
anywhere outside their "vertical plane" without the
offense having license to undercut them. Can you
imagine a game where the defense had to always stop before
jumping to insure they were jumping inside their vertical
plane? It's absurd.

Originally posted by Ref in PA

If A1 is already in a path and B1 jumps to block the path but does not come down before the A1 gets to the point, foul on B1. However, if B1 jumps to a point, and A1 alters his path or initiates a new path to get to B1's landing point before B1 lands, I have a foul on A1. To say anything different would make it legal to undercut anyone at any time. [/B]

[rockyroad]

So in the long run, we can learn this lesson from all of this discussion - you had better see the entire play! If you are turning your head late to pick it up, you have no idea who jumped where, so see the whole play...