I asked this a couple of years ago, but need more advice. We now have had "hand checking" as a POE for three straight years. The use of hands "off-ball" on defense continues to be vexing to me. This year they speak of "jabbing" instead of "tagging" and they emphasize "continuous touch." In years past they have explicitly said hand checking is not incidental and is a foul, etc. The verbiage does not restrict this to the ball handler and explicitly the POE says the location on the floor is irrelevent (i.e., post versus perimeter).

When is the use of the hands legal off the ball, if ever? Can a defender who is fronting the post reach back and tag the offensive player find him? The defender is not trying to "displace" the offensive man or hold him, but he is obviously touching to gain an advantage. If the defender can touch, can the offense push the hand away?

I interprete the rules and POE's to prohibit all "touching" that is intentional, non-incidental and designed to gain an advantage. I know officials are rightfully loath to call "touch" fouls, but should they consistently instruct defenders to cease hand tagging to find the offense?

Displacement is the key.
 

This is where you judgment has to come in. You also have to use some logic and common sense as well. You cannot call and it is not to your benefit to call a foul on players that just touch each other. There has to be some kind of displacement. And if I am not mistaken, handchecking only has to do with the ball carrier, not the "off-ball" player.

Really what is legal and illegal is up to you and your partners. Without seeing the particular play, it is not good judgment to just call players touching each other.

Peace

Re: Displacement is the key.
 

Rut, I concur that displacement should be the key, and I also concur that "it is not good judgment to just call players touching each other." This is great advice, and I hope that all officials, coaches, and players follow it.

I take exception, however, to your statement that "what is legal and illegal is up to you and your partners." This may reflect the reality of a given game, but is along the same vein as "the only crime is getting caught." Officials cannot (and I have not seen anything from posters here to indicate that this community does) treat questions of legality and illegality as subject to their own whims. I'm sure you didn't mean to imply that officials can make up the rules as they go along, and that as long as they agree among themselves it is ok, but that is kind of what your statement sounded like. If one set of officials feel that "touches" are illegal and call it that way, then another set deems that displacement and advantage is required, then what is the use of rules? Coaches, players, and even partners would be forced to guess about many, many situations in every game. It would be worse than trying to guess an umpire's strike zone in baseball.

Hand-checking is a perfect example of how things can get ambiguous very quickly. The wording in the POEs have not been as good as they should be, and it seems to take about half a season for sanity and consistency to work its way in to the games. Discussions about it, as started on this thread, are a great way to clarify and alleviate the confusion.

Displacement might not be the right word. It's pretty obvious that a defender could gain a big advantage against the dribbler without actually displacing him/her. If you think the defender is gaining an unfair advantage by using the hands, it's a foul. Think of a defender using hands to prevent a dribbling player from "turning the corner" on a drive. No displacement, but definitely a foul. The POE implies that in general, the NFHS believes that officials have been letting too much hand use go uncalled. The rule book can only go so far in describing a foul or it would become larger than a school text book.

Z

Please do not take this out of context.
 

CYO Butch,

Everyone's judgment is different. What is considered displacement one night, might be conconsidered fine the next night. And that is the nature of the beast. Especially when you talk about the baseball comparison. I am a baseball umpire and my strike zone is not the same as others strike zones. Umpires positioning, philosophy and ability can all factor in the differences of just a strike zone. So what is a strike or how much a pitch is considered a strike can vary from game to game. No differnet from a baskeball official's perspective (or any sport for that matter). What is displacement is going to vary from team to team, player to player and official to official. So my comment, "you have to decide what is legal and illegal," is just to say that I might call one thing a foul, the next time that might not be called. And depending on the skill of the players and the type of game I have, displacement is going to vary from time to time. The only thing I can add is call the game the first 4-6 minutes how you are going to call the game the entire game. Or at the very least, call all the handchecking, screens, rebounding fouls to set a tone, so that you will not have to call that when the game is on the line. It is the job of the players and coaches to adjust to us, not the other way around. For one, I cannot call the game based on what happen during a game I did not see or officiate myself. No one can.

Peace

What other word discribes this better?
 

What if the defender is not successful in using there hands? Are you going to take away a successful basket or attempt, just because the defender used their hands? I am still going to require some displacement or some kind of movement before I call a foul. You cannot just call a foul based on what the defender is trying to do, you have to call it based on what they have accomplished. The words displacment accurately IMHO, make that clearer to what is a foul. But it is really easy to use words to discribe what is a foul or not, you still have to prove that on the court.

Peace

I'm not sure what a better word might be than displacement. I have heard camp instructors say a foul should be called when a defender uses their hands to <i> control </i> an offensive player. so maybe control would be a better word. When I think of displacement, I think of a defender actually moving an offensive player out of a spot and I can think of situations that would be a handchecking foul where the offensive player did not actually get moved.

Obviously you wouldn't take away a basket if the offensive player played through the contact, but that has to do with being able to hold your whistle.

Z

I agree that control is part of the equation. It's really several terms. Control, advantage, imped, restrict and probably several more. Ask yourself, he committing an unbasketball and does it but the offended play at disadvantage?

First, welcome to the forum.

Second, help me out with that statement. :)

I agree that control is part of the equation. It's really several terms. Control, advantage, imped, restrict and probably several more. Ask yourself,IS he committing an unbasketball ACT and does it PUT the offended play at disadvantage? (Makes more sense when I learn to spell don't type to fast.)

I also agree that you don't have hand checking if the player doesn't have the ball. You can have holding or blocking.

I think one of the big thinks that helps me with advantange/disadvantge, handchecking, etc. is video tape review & watching others work. Watch what those that are working at the next level are calling as fouls. If you know those folks, don't be afraid to call, e-mail whatever, and ask them about a play. Why was such and such a foul and the other play not?

Hope this is clearer

Back to off-ball.
 

I really do not see how any of that language makes the situation clearer, but if it works for someone to have better understanding, then use it. Displacement to me just suggests that I am unable to do what I was trying to do. So it really does not take a lot of contact to have displacement. But if we are talking about off ball, displacement is the best language I can come up with to discribe what should be called. Because there is usually more contact allowed off-ball, especially when the players are both fighting for position. And just because a player is leaning on another player, does not mean you have a foul. Maybe we are talking about a Shaq type specimen and you are not going to easily move that individual in the post.

But that is 6 in one hand, half a dozen in the other. ;)

Peace

It's simple, really. He got it from the instructions for assembling a bike made in Hong Kong.http://www.deephousepage.com/smilies/nixweiss.gif

terminology
 

A little bit of additional terminology might clarify the issue for some people: rather than using 'displacement' as the catch-all term, using 'impede' and 're-route' might be more appropriate in some instances.

Maybe we should think of hand checking in the same way as the definition of a "yield" traffic sign. You haven't "yielded" if you caused the other car to change its speed and/or direction. If you run the sign, but haven't caused the other car to change at least one of those things, technically you "yielded". A yield sign is not the same as a stop sign. The stop sign would be a good analogy only if we were supposed to call all hand contact as a foul.

Not sure if what he is talking about when he says unbasketball ACT, but we do talk about things as being "non-basketball plays" around these hear parts, maybe it's the same thing, I dunno.

I always fall back to advantage/disadvantage
 

There is always contact. 10 people in a small area.
But, look for someone using it for an advantage. If no advantage, no call. I don't think displacement is relevant using this.

A better term than "displacement" is "SBQ". It stands for "speed, balance, quickness". Affecting any of things gives a great advantage to the defender, regardless of court position.

If a player's speed, balance, or quickness is affected, it's a foul; whether or not the player has been displaced.

It's an NBA-ism, but it's one that has been a HUGE help to me.

Chuck

I would like to interject a point here, that this is not a foul on the ball-handler only. Hand-checking CAN occur against an opponent without the ball, although it is much less common. I like Chuck's "SBQ". These can apply equally as well to someone who is trying to receive a pass, as to someone who is trying to pass or shoot. And remember that nothing in the way the rule is written implies that it applies only to the play against the ball-handler.

Rainmaker is onto what I am asking
 

There is, in fact, a difference in wording between the 2003-04 and 01-02 and 02-03 Points of Emphasis In 02-03 and 01-02, the section on handchecking was headed "hands off", in 03-04 it is just "handchecking." As I read them they all convey the spirit of "hands off".

Of course, I am not claiming "hands off" means "no touching." Incidental touching not intended to gain an advantage or resulting in advantage and particularly off-ball incidental touches are almost always ignored in practice and are addressed and defined in the rules. In 2002, for example (page 69 of NFHS Rules, under "Points of Emphasis") the statement appears: "The measuring up of an opponent (tagging) is handchecking, is not permitted, and is a FOUL [emphasis in original]." It also refers to both offensice and defensive players - so obviously they are not meaning the ball ahndler. In 03-04 they speak of "jabbing" instead of "tagging" and they refer also to continuous touching, but there is no change in the rule. The rules do not use the words "dribbler" "ball handler" "perimeter player" etc., and they do not distinguish where on the floor the touching occurs. In 03-04 they added the phrase "guidelines for teaching and officiating." The fact that off-ball touching, tagging, etc is rarely called is partly the fact that officials watch the ball, so alot of off-ball shenanigans go on.

In the 01-02 book (page 68, 4-A "Hands off") is the statement: "Hand checking is not incidental contact; it gives a tremendous advantage to the person illegally using his hands."

Rule Section 4-27 is the definition of "incidental contact" (p 34-35 of the 01-02 rules - I don't have the most recent book). Locating the position of an opponent by tagging, touching, hand checking, or what ever you want to call it, is not contained in the permitted incidental contacts. (Again, the POE explicitly declares hand checking not incidental). The closest applicable article is is Art. 3: "Similarly, contact which does not hinder the opponent from participating in normal defensive or offensive movements should be considered incidental." The use of the hands by touching, tagging, handchecking to locate the opponent is obviously intended to gain an advantage and "hinder the opponent" and is not incidental, and when coupled with the POE's is definitive to my eyes.

Rule 10-6-1 ("contact") prohibits putting a hand on an oppenet with one exception - the only time when a player may intentionally place his hand on an opponent: "He/she shall not contact an opponent with his/her hand unless such contact is only with the opponent's hand while it is on the ball and is incidental to an attempt to play the ball."

Here's the two POE lists from the past two years:
2003-2004:
2. Rough Play – Guidelines For Teaching And Officiating
A. Handchecking
B. Screening
C. Post Play
D. Rebounding
E. Block/Charge
F. Officiating Points

2002-2003:
4. Rough Play
A. Hands off
B. Post-play
C. Screens
D. Protecting the Shooter
E. Excess Swinging of Arm(s)/Elbow(s)

When I read the rules in their totality, it seems clear to me that the spirit of the rules is that use of the hands to gain an advantage by touching, tagging, handchecking, jabbing, etc. is prohibited on-ball and off-ball and all over the court.

There are many players and coaches who use the "it's only illegal

I suspect that one could play a whole season employing tactics like tagging and touching to locate and never get it called. But that doesn't make those actions within the rules.

In the code of ethics of the N. Fed of Coaches appears this statement: "The coach shall master the contest rules and shall teach them to his or her team members. The coach shall not seek advantage by circumvention of the spirit or letter of the rule."

Sorry for the long post, but should coaches teach their players to use their hands to find and keep track of their opponent? To me this seems to be prohibitied and should be stopped. I'm not advocating calling every example, but it seems to me it should not be a tactic taught to young players, as it is not an allowed form of incidental contact by the plain language of the rules.

Re: Rainmaker is onto what I am asking
 

It seems to me that regardless of what others do, the player who can play great defense without any contact at all is at a tremendous advantage and it's an entirely legal advantage. It would NEVER hurt for a coach to teach players to keep hands off.

Re: Rainmaker is onto what I am asking
 

I guess you don't have any teenage daughters.http://www.deephousepage.com/smilies/Yikes_anim.gif

Re: Re: Rainmaker is onto what I am asking
 

You can touch without using hands . . . .


Wow.

I'm going to go break into a pharmacy now and take as many meds as possible.

I agree 100% with the statement previously made in this thread that when you have ten players and two or three officials running around in a small area, that there will be some incidental contact. Having said that, I would like to pose the following question:

Why does a player need to touch an opposing player with his/her hands or forearms to play basketball? Especially when the player can see his/her opponent 99.99% of the time.

Fronting the post...
 

is the situation where I see the most off-ball tagging, touching etc. (But some teams also seem to be taught to keep a hand on their man in rebounding situations, as they are watching the ball and not their man.) Basically the defender uses the tag or touch to "keep track" of the defender behind him. This varies from an occasional "tag" to nearly continues touching. Sometimes the offense player pushes or sways the tag away - occasionally this escalates.

If there is illegal contact using the hands away from the ball, it is advisable to not use the term "hand checking". It is a foul, regardless of what term and signal you use.

Coaches now have come to equate "hand checking" to action on the ball handler. Therefore, it is a good idea to use either a hold or a push or even a hack (we don't use illegal use of hands in Texas :) ) when reporting your foul. There is no difference in the penalty, so why try to confuse and incite the coaches over semantics.

The same thing goes for a drive to the basket. If there is a shot taken, the call should be something besides "hand checking".