PC foul?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Great discussion on this topic BTW. I just honestly believe that the contact would have been avoided. Next I look at who is more responsible for this contact, and on this particular play I believe the offense is and for that reason I would go PC or nothing. Then just take my butt chewing from whichever coach I get it from!!

So the player does this 5 feet from the basket and gives a fake and the defender goes airborne, then the shooter jumps to make sure that contact takes place, you are calling a PC foul?

Peace

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

So the player does this 5 feet from the basket and gives a fake and the defender goes airborne, then the shooter jumps to make sure that contact takes place, you are calling a PC foul?

Peace

That is different than the play we are looking at. The shooter in this play is not yet airborne. He moved into the path of the defender while starting the usual movement that precedes a try. Had Love been in the air with the same contact then yeah defender foul all the way. He moved into the path of the defender outside his shoulder width with his feet, creating the contact illegally according to the end of the paragraph of 4-23-1.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

That is different than the play we are looking at. The shooter in this play is not yet airborne. He moved into the path of the defender while starting the usual movement that precedes a try. Had Love been in the air with the same contact then yeah defender foul all the way. He moved into the path of the defender outside his shoulder width with his feet, creating the contact illegally according to the end of the paragraph of 4-23-1.

So if A1 is dribbling the ball towards the basket and B2 comes running from the wing, jumps, and lands on A1's dribbling arm it's not a foul on B2?

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

So if A1 is dribbling the ball towards the basket and B2 comes running from the wing, jumps, and lands on A1's dribbling arm it's not a foul on B2?

Why would it not be?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

So if A1 is dribbling the ball towards the basket and B2 comes running from the wing, jumps, and lands on A1's dribbling arm it's not a foul on B2?

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

Why would it not be?

According you and a fellow from Oklahoma, A1 would be responsible for moving into the path of an airborne defender, right?

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

According you and a fellow from Oklahoma, A1 would be responsible for moving into the path of an airborne defender, right?

I never said that, and that is a different situation than this one.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by OKREF

I never said that, and that is a different situation than this one.

Does this count:

Originally Posted by OKREF

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

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

According you and a fellow from Oklahoma, A1 would be responsible for moving into the path of an airborne defender, right?

My point was that Love extended into the path of the defender illegally, which, in your scenario the ball handler was still in a legal position. I would retract that statement now after realizing that an airborne shooter is considered airborne even though they may be on the ground but are in the act of shooting. But now I am confused becuase I have no idea what the H-E double hockey sticks Bob is referring to.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

My point was that Love extended into the path of the defender illegally ...

What if this were 3 feet from the basket and Love leaned/jumped forward to flip the ball off the glass. Would that make the legality of the contact any different?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

My point was that Love extended into the path of the defender illegally, which, in your scenario the ball handler was still in a legal position. I would retract that statement now after realizing that an airborne shooter is considered airborne even though they may be on the ground but are in the act of shooting. But now I am confused becuase I have no idea what the H-E double hockey sticks Bob is referring to.

A player who is on the ground cannot, by definition, be an airborne shooter. A player holding the ball cannot, by definition, be an airborne shooter (but s/he can be in the act of shooting).

A player who has released the ball on a try is no longer in the act of shooting, unless he or she is an airborne shooter.

None of the above matters (I don't think) on this particular play, but can matter on different plays. Your (apparent) misunderstanding of the two definitions (and, iirc, other definitions) could cause you to rule incorrectly.

So, my gentle suggestion would be to read the book more (and read for greater understanding) and post less (it's NOT my suggestion that you stop posting altogether).

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

So the player does this 5 feet from the basket and gives a fake and the defender goes airborne, then the shooter jumps to make sure that contact takes place, you are calling a PC foul?

Peace

If the defender stays in his vertical plane, yes, if not, block.