PC foul?

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by maven

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.

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.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by OKREF

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.

"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.

[Adam]

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.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Adam

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.

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?

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

"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.

Agreed. In the video, the defense jumps and has a right to come down, the offense jumps out of his vertical plane and creates the contact. Turn it around. What if the offense jumps and prior to returning to the floor the defense jumps out of his vertical plane and creates contact with the offense. We have a foul on the defense.

[OKREF]

BTW does Love jump towards the basket or sideways? I think sideways.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

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)

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?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

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?

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.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Adam

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.

Love intentionally placed himself in the path of a moving opponent without the ball giving him neither time nor distance

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by OKREF

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

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

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

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

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.

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

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.

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.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by OKREF

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.

4-19-1 says "airborne shooter". The defensive player cannot be an airborne shooter (or at least he isn't in this play).

[APG]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

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.

There is no doubt that the official in the play (Marc Davis) is signaling that the try is for 2 and that the shooter will have two shoots. If he was going to communicate the foul was before the player was in the act of shooting, he would have waved off the shot.

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by bainsey

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?

Still undecided on this play. Here's something I don't fully understand. Obviously the defender obtained LGP and tried to block first shot, offense "passes" off team mate and regather's the ball, then shoots. My question is when does the defender lose LGP and secondly, would anyone consider that he had reobtained LGP while approaching shooter from behind. I think according to 4-23-2, he had LGP albeit from the side/behind.