Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 847350)

I had a screen shot I made of the middle of that play but I seem to have misplaced it...perhaps on my other machine. It shows blue coming over white's leg (in mid-stride) and side to get to the position where the elbow could make the contact it did. And prior to that, long before the elbow is involved, white is reaching across blue to hold him from cutting...then the elbow comes up to get that arm off of him.

A defender doesn't get to fly into an opponent and get bailed out because the contact happened to involve an elbow...one that was never extended....it was just there. It didn't knock the player over, the hip/body contact was already doing that.

To call the elbow rewards a defender who was out of position, late to the play, and illegal in more than one way. The elbow is easy to see and is an easy way out....but not the right call.

How many times do we (correctly) get accused of getting the 2nd, sometimes bigger, foul because it gets our attention, even though it was a reaction and retaliation to the first one. In this case, that is the 2nd foul (maybe even the 3rd). And, short of it being ruled intentional, is nothing since the first foul(s) made the ball dead.

Originally Posted by rwest (Post 847549)

After thinking about it from a physics standpoint, I believe I know what is happening. Still not 100% sure because I can't slow it down frame by frame, but the physics works.

Both players are of a similar height and weight so there mass is going to be similar. They are both moving but in different directions. The offensive player is moving faster than the defender. So the offensive player has greater force. However, I don't believe the force from the hip contact is enough to displace the player. Remember, we have to take into account the force the defender is exerting. The force the offensive player is generating has to be sufficiently greater than the defenders to account for the displacement. I don't believe it is. It is however enough to cause him to be off balance. The elbow then causes him to be displaced like he was. That is why it appears to me that the defender gains momentum when contact occurs with the elbow. The hip caused the player to be off balance but it was the elbow the sent the player to the floor.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 847553)

Good explanation. And I don't think I can disagree with any of it.

So then, was the hip contact legal or not (offensive foul, defensive foul, neither)?. Why?

I think we all agree that the hip contact was not an offensive foul, but was a potential defensive foul that some say is marginal.

Assuming that is not a foul....

Did that hip contact (caused by the defender who was clearly not in LGP) put the defender in a very precarious position where it would only take minor additional contact to send him over the edge? Did the elbow contact really put the defender at any more of a disadvantage or was the disadvantage mostly from being off balance from the hip contact?

Originally Posted by rwest (Post 847556)

Let me answer with a question. Assuming I have the sequence of events and the physics correct, would the player have gone to the floor without the elbow? I believe the answer to that question is the answer to whether or not we should have an offensive foul. It seems obvious to me that the offensive player was not disadvantaged because he was able to get a shot attempt off. The secondary player may have fouled, but I have nothing on the primary defender. And if we call a foul on the offensive player, then the secondary defenders contact would have been irrelevant. Having said all that, I believe the elbow is what sent the player to the floor and can't be ignored. I have an offensive foul. Remember the disadvantage to the defender was that he was not in a position to rebound the missed shot.

Originally Posted by rwest (Post 847549)

Thinking about it from a physics standpoint.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 847558)

This is where we differ, I think he was going to the floor with or without the elbow, due to the hip contact form his cutting across the path of the offensive player, and the elbow was just the icing on the cake and to call and offensive foul would be bailing out a poor defensive play by a player was late to the spot.

Originally Posted by JetMetFan (Post 847543)

I sent the clip to one of my mentors who I respect a great deal. He also happens to be a longtime IAABO interpreter as well as an IAABO life member. Here are his thoughts:

Originally Posted by JetMetFan (Post 847543)

I sent the clip to one of my mentors who I respect a great deal. He also happens to be a longtime IAABO interpreter as well as an IAABO life member. Here are his thoughts:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 847635)

The defender was moving, so his 'position on the floor" doesn't exist as far as something to which he's entitled. He did not have LGP, so he isn't entitled to be moving, either, at the point of contact

I had a play last weekend, A1 driving and B1 slides in and commits a blocking foul. Just after contact, A1 extends her elbow in a push to get B1 off. I call the block.

B coach gives me the elbow motion as I'm reporting the foul. I walk close enough to tell him that the push occurred after the blocking foul. Are you saying I should have ignored the block and called the push?

Originally Posted by Brad (Post 847634)

Your mentor needs to learn what legal guarding position is - "two feet and facing the defender" ... this player never has it. The defender is the one that goes diving / leaning in to try to steal the ball and it is his own actions that cause him to go to the floor.

No way that this is an offensive foul.

Originally Posted by JetMetFan (Post 847638)

Not at all. If the elbow was judged as something to be addressed then call a T for the deadball contact. Calling a T doesn't do anything to take away the common foul.

I'm not saying everyone has to ignore the contact from White #22 in the OP. What I'm saying is I didn't think it was worthy of a foul call. It's also my feeling the elbow by Blue #1 needed to be dealt with regardless of what was or wasn't called on White #22. Since I didn't have a foul on White #22 the contact by Blue #1 - from my perspective - would be a PC/TC foul.

Originally Posted by JetMetFan (Post 847638)

Not at all. If the elbow was judged as something to be addressed then call a T for the deadball contact. Calling a T doesn't do anything to take away the common foul.

I'm not saying everyone has to ignore the contact from White #22 in the OP. What I'm saying is I didn't think it was worthy of a foul call. It's also my feeling the elbow by Blue #1 needed to be dealt with regardless of what was or wasn't called on White #22. Since I didn't have a foul on White #22 the contact by Blue #1 - from my perspective - would be a PC/TC foul.

Originally Posted by JetMetFan (Post 847639)

Brad, I'm sure he knows. He's been doing this much longer than me. :)

You'll notice he didn't mention LGP in his explanation. All he said was White #22 was "entitled to his position on the floor." You can be the "victim" (for lack of a better term) of a PC/TC foul without having LGP if the offensive player does something like kick his/her leg out or, in this case, extends his/her arms.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 847641)

And THAT says that if you were to call a foul on White #22, then you would ignore the elbow...

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 847642)

The problem with that argument is that he was moving to a new position on the floor...and one to which he was not entitled by any rule.