Play for Discussion No Call or Foul

[jeschmit]

Originally Posted by rwest

You believe the defender would have ended up on the end-line if there was no contact? The contact occurred about 3 feet below the free throw line and he ended up on the end line. He went at least 10 to 12 feet. He would not have ended up there without the contact and he wasn't falling until contact was made.

Without saying it in my original post BNR got what I was getting at with his response...

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

From this angle I can't see the amount of contact, if any, from A1's arm to B1's torso. It also appears just as likely that B1 tripped from tangling feet with A1.

[BLydic]

Originally Posted by Maineac

I have nothing. Two guys going for a loose ball. Agree on the "ugly" part.

Well said.

[Brad]

No call on the player going to the floor -- two players going for the ball, plus a bit of a flop imo.

I do have a foul on the shot though -- defender hit/held shooter's elbow as he is shooting.

[twocentsworth]

Laying on my couch while watching this play on mi iPhone....I've got nothing here (of course my angle/positioning isn't the best - but comfortable as hell!!!!)

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Nothing, as well.

Not a charge: 1 Blue was playing the ball without an outstretched limb touching 22 White, and 22 White had nothing resembling LGP.

Not a block: The contact simply didn't hinder 1 Blue.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

IF anything, I have a foul on white 22 (the defender, "B").

These two posts sum my thoughts completely on the play.

[JugglingReferee]

I do not have a blocking foul on 22 white (for not giving time and distance to a player without the ball) because 1 blue was not disadvantaged.

After 1 blue raised his arm and illegally contacted 22 white, his arm continued to rise up into 22 white's space. It is unclear to me if 1 blue had the ball at this point, so I am going with a common team control foul on 1 blue.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

I do not have a blocking foul on 22 white (for not giving time and distance to a player without the ball) because 1 blue was not disadvantaged.

After 1 blue raised his arm and illegally contacted 22 white, his arm continued to rise up into 22 white's space. It is unclear to me if 1 blue had the ball at this point, so I am going with a common team control foul on 1 blue.

I'd suggest that blue was disadvantaged by being put in a position to react by raising his arm to fend of a defender who was in an illegal position. The only reason blue's arm was even an issue is because white was coming over his shoulder in an attempt to play the ball. It is whole unjust to penalize blue for this arm given how it developed.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Brad

No call on the player going to the floor -- two players going for the ball, plus a bit of a flop imo.

I do have a foul on the shot though -- defender hit/held shooter's elbow as he is shooting.

I honestly didn't even think about the first contact (which most everyone is discussing) and was more focused on the contact on the shot/defender in the restricted area.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

I honestly didn't even think about the first contact (which most everyone is discussing) and was more focused on the contact on the shot/defender in the restricted area.

The 2nd defender was legal. It appears that he was fully vertical and, as such, was allowed to have his arm in that space when the shooter's jump brought their arms together. The defender is not required to yield the vertical space just because the shooter creates contact there.

RA not an issue either once the shooter paused, dribbled, and turned for a short jumper. The 2nd defender became the primary defender once the shooter's path stopped and changed direction.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I'd suggest that blue was disadvantaged by being put in a position to react by raising his arm to fend of a defender who was in an illegal position. The only reason blue's arm was even an issue is because white was coming over his shoulder in an attempt to play the ball. It is whole unjust to penalize blue for this arm given how it developed.

Raising a arm to fend off a defender is not legal regardless of how that defender got there. If you think there was a foul going over his shoulder then call the foul then but if you pass on it you can't allow the offense to displace a defender. And he was displaced. No way that was a flop as someone else has stated.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rwest

Raising a arm to fend off a defender is not legal regardless of how that defender got there. If you think there was a foul going over his shoulder then call the foul then but if you pass on it you can't allow the offense to displace a defender. And he was displaced. No way that was a flop as someone else has stated.

You have to get the first foul. If you pass on it, you really can't tag the other person for responding to it and call it the right call.

And BTW, the displacement had zero to do with the arm. That arm barely touched him. It was merely there. If you look carefully, the displacement had to do with the defender's hip running into the hip of the offensive player as he tried to squeeze by him. You can tell because the defender's body first moved away and was bent at the hip level. If it was the arm, the defender would have been pushed over from the top.

I don't know why so many want to make this play about something it isn't. This defender was late to the spot and there was a collision first. The arm is secondary.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

You have to get the first foul. If you pass on it, you really can't tag the other person for responding to it and call it the right call.

And BTW, the displacement had zero to do with the arm. That arm barely touched him. It was merely there. If you look carefully, the displacement had to do with the defender's hip running into the hip of the offensive player as he tried to squeeze by him. You can tell because the defender's body first moved away and was bent at the hip level. If it was the arm, the defender would have been pushed over from the top.

I don't know why so many want to make this play about something it isn't. This defender was late to the spot and there was a collision first. The arm is secondary.

The defender was bent at the hip level because he was running. The contact with the arm was not insignificant. It's simple physics. The offensive player was running forward. His arm is moving at the same speed as the rest of the body. When contact occurs the energy is transferred to the defender. Again simple physics. Also, the defender's movement is consistent with contact in the upper torso. He would not have been pushed over because the contact was lateral and not in a downward trajectory.

I admit that after slowing the film down, I'm not as convinced it was an offensive foul, but in real time I have no problem with a team control foul. Just because the defender does not have legal guarding position does not give the offensive player the right to displace him.

[Brick43]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

I honestly didn't even think about the first contact (which most everyone is discussing) and was more focused on the contact on the shot/defender in the restricted area.

My thoughts exactly. I like to watch the video before reading any comments so I am not influenced and I hadn't a clue the outside contact was in question. Now knowing that and with the aid of watching instant replay several times, I still got nothing there. Player in white is clearly off balance attempting to steal the pass. Not only is he on one foot at the point of contact but he is reaching out with the opposite hand. Absolutely any contact is going to send him to the floor.

[APG]

I agree with Camron...that arm out had nothing to do with the defender going to the floor. The contact that sent the player to the floor was caused by the offensive player's hip after the defender tried to reach a loose ball from a less advantageous position.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rwest

The defender was bent at the hip level because he was running.

You normally see people run while bent sideways at the hip while running?

Originally Posted by rwest

The contact with the arm was not insignificant. It's simple physics. The offensive player was running forward. His arm is moving at the same speed as the rest of the body. When contact occurs the energy is transferred to the defender. Again simple physics.

Simple physics, yes. The arm was only significant in that it happened to be between the two players when they initially came together and any potentially fouling contact with it occurred after the body/hip contact that was already sending the defender on his way.

Originally Posted by rwest

Also, the defender's movement is consistent with contact in the upper torso. He would not have been pushed over because the contact was lateral and not in a downward trajectory.

The reaction of contact at the hip level vs. chest level is different. The defender's body response was consistent with hip-level contact...it moved away first at the hip level. Lateral contact up high will cause the exact opposite effect. This even more evident when you see how the defender landed...basically on his butt with his torso upright and facing the offensive player. Getting pushed over by the arm would not create that result. It would have sent him down in a completely different manner.

You basically had two bodies moving that came together. To be moving at the time of body contact, a defender must have LGP...he wasn't in A1's path, he wasn't facing A1, and he was moving towards A1. If he doesn't have LGP it is a block. Very simple. Arm contact after that doesn't matter.