Directives

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by tref

Totally agree BNR! 5 on 4 is penalty enough
From the OP:



When a defender flops & that action doesnt allow the shooter to safely land, we still should protect the shooter (up & down) so its a block in that sitch. For the life of me, I cannot understand how a flop which causes multiple bodies to be down in the paint can be no-called simply because the defender flopped.

It is, with the most common types of flops, actually quite rare and difficult for a flop to increase the amount of contact such that it causes the shooter to go down when they would have not otherwise gone down. It is also very unlikely that the flop diminishes the safety for the shooter. If the flopper had remained in position, the contact would have almost always been greater. By flopping away, it usually either reduces or eliminates any contact that occurs.

The times where that isn't true is when the flopper has leaned sideways in addition to flopping....illegally leaning into the path of the shooter. That alone, if there is contact, is likely grounds for a block and the addition of a flop doesn't alter the likely result (and call).

As for multiple bodies going down with a no call...sometimes that results from the defender flopping and the shooter contorting their movements to make the play....all without contact. Even with contact, it is possible the defender was legal and the contact caused the shooter to go off balance but not knock the defender out of position followed by the flop. The flop doesn't cause the multiple bodies to go down. The flop is just coincidental to bodies going down.

The directive of needing a foul when two or more bodies go down isn't 100%, but it is more like 99%. If there was enough contact that two bodies ended up on the floor, it is extremely likely that one of them committed a foul (with a couple of exceptions).

Originally Posted by tref

We promote what we allow...

If he flops & the shooter can continue unhindered, yeah, I can see it as a play on sitch.