Originally Posted by maven (Post 863603)

No rule requires a player to remain in his "vertical plane." Doing so is no guarantee that a player's actions are legal, and failing to do so is not as such illegal. This worry is a red herring.

Originally Posted by OKREF (Post 863604)

Really? If the offense and defense both jump straight up and are vertical, and the offensive player extends his arm to clear out the defense, he has not stayed in his vertical plane. Same for the defense, they may extend their arms but must stay in their vertical plane when doing so.

Originally Posted by Adam (Post 863607)

I was thinking of screens, actually, either offensive or defensive (trying to slow the cutter).

Add to the the ball screen, which is what this play looks like to me.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 863606)

"Leaving the vertical plane" (sic) is not, in and of itself, an infraction. "Leaving the vertical plane and causing contact" might be.

That was the point.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 863570)

Only the offensive player is protected by 4-23-4b and 4-23-5d (if airborne, the guard must have obtained legal position before the opponent left the floor)

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 863608)

But he is not screening, he is going airborne towards the basket for a try.

How about this play:

B2 is running running parallel to the endline and jumps towards the basket and A1, approaching perpendicular to the endline, then goes airborne towards the basket and they collide mid-air. Who is the foul on?

Originally Posted by Adam (Post 863612)

I disagree. If he wanted the best shot, he just had to hold a beat and let the defender pass. Instead, he intentionally placed himself in the path of a moving opponent without the ball, giving him neither time nor distance.

Originally Posted by OKREF (Post 863609)

Agreed. In the video, the defense jumps and has a right to come down,

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 863617)

Reference, please. Not saying you're wrong, I just can't place it in my mind's eye copy of the rule book.

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee (Post 863537)

I don't use the phrase "on the ground". A player can be still touching the floor (which is what on the ground means) and still be in the act of shooting.

The official was signalling that the shooter was shooting a 2-point attempt - his right foot was still in contact with the floor when he was fouled and before he became airborne. He did this because this particular shooter was previously behind the arc and executed a move to draw a "foul" - the shooter even looked over his right shoulder to find the defender. The proof is that the official extended two fingers towards the ground where the right foot was located.

Originally Posted by OKREF (Post 863622)

I don't know that its in there. Just an assumption that an airborne player has the right to land without someone contacting him. I am probably wrong.


Maybe 4-19-1.

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes (Post 863623)

I don't use that phrase or signal either for the same reasons you mention above (not to mention it isn't an approved mechanic). I was just pointing out the fact that it looked like that was what the official was calling in the video, although looking at it again, I think your reading of what the official was communicating is more correct.

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 863611)

This is why I can see a foul on the defense.

Having said that, someone here said -- paraphrasing -- that the shooter didn't contact the defender with an appendage. What about the entire body? It looks to me like the shooter clearly threw everything he had into the defender, which is why I also have a PC foul. Isn't this one of those rare instances where you can have both?