Charge

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I'm confused about this play, and I'm at work and don't have my books. In the case of a dunker, is the ball dead when it passes through the hoop, or does the ball remain live until the airborne shooter returns to the floor?

It is dead, but for the purpose of a personal foul, by or against an airborne shooter, it doesn't matter.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

In the case of a dunker, is the ball dead when it passes through the hoop, or does the ball remain live until the airborne shooter returns to the floor?

Originally Posted by just another ref

It is dead, but for the purpose of a personal foul, by or against an airborne shooter, it doesn't matter.

So does JRutledge's statement, "The contact or the action that put the player on the floor mostly took place after the ball was through the hoop" really make any difference in interpreting this play?

[Rich]

If I have the defender where he needs to be and there's a knee in the face -- that's going to have me shipping it the other way.

If the defender isn't where he's supposed to be, I'm calling a block.

Knee in the face + player going down hurt + player possibly stepping on the defender does not equal "nothing" in my game.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Rich

Knee in the face + player going down hurt + player possibly stepping on the defender does not equal "nothing" in my game.

Anything can happen.


A1 has a breakaway, pursued by B1. Just inside the free throw line, B1 makes a desperate lunge to attempt the strip. He slips and goes to the floor and catches a knee in the face. A1 stumbles slightly, then rights himself and completes the layup. B1 remains on the floor.

Perhaps an official's timeout, but otherwise this sounds like it could easily be a no call.

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I can live with the no call on this as the contact took place mostly after the dunk. So to me the contact is mostly incidental as it did not prevent the dunk from happening and the play was basically over. I guess I can see a block or charge call here, but I would need another look or angle to see if the defender was not moving sideways when the player went airborne.

Peace

If anyone evaluating here watched us no-call this, there would be an a** reaming after the game. I can't even take you seriously anymore. You take the opposite side of stuff like this just to entertain yourself.

Originally Posted by canuckrefguy

Better answer:

"You know, you're right...I said the contact took place after the dunk, and I was clearly wrong."

You must not have much experience with Rut. He doesn't care what anyone else calls or doesn't call in their games (Or so he says), but he'll spend hours on here being the contrarian and arguing with people about why he's right and they're wrong. We don't all have the wisdom and experience he does, just ask him.

Originally Posted by Rich

If I have the defender where he needs to be and there's a knee in the face -- that's going to have me shipping it the other way.

If the defender isn't where he's supposed to be, I'm calling a block.

Knee in the face + player going down hurt + player possibly stepping on the defender does not equal "nothing" in my game.

In the words of Dave Hester: "Yeeeeep"

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I guess 4-27 is not a rule? Or is it because you do not like people that do not agree with you?

Something tells me the latter.

Peace

You don't like people who don't agree with you, which is evident by the fact that you spend a good amount of time arguing with everyone when you're the only dissenting opinion. Even after you were proven wrong about the play being over before the contact, you still held firm.

For the record, I would probably have a PC foul here. Even if I called a block, I would feel better about it than having no whistle at all just because it might upset everyone watching the pretty dunk.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by zm1283

We don't all have the wisdom and experience he does, just ask him.

This is called "figjam". I'll let you figure out what the letters stand for.

[APG]

It's pretty clear that all productive talk on this play is long over.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

So does JRutledge's statement, "The contact or the action that put the player on the floor mostly took place after the ball was through the hoop" really make any difference in interpreting this play?

No

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

So does JRutledge's statement, "The contact or the action that put the player on the floor mostly took place after the ball was through the hoop" really make any difference in interpreting this play?

Only for people that like to make up their own rules.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Only for people that like to make up their own rules.

I guess 4-27 is not a rule? Or is it because you do not like people that do not agree with you?

Something tells me the latter.

Peace

[Adam]

So why bother allowing a personal foul on contact with an airborne shooter after the ball is through the basket.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I guess 4-27 is not a rule? Or is it because you do not like people that do not agree with you?

Something tells me the latter.

Peace

That has nothing to do with the timing of the contact relative to the time that the ball goes through the hoop....which is the point being discussed even though it wasn't even what happened either.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

That has nothing to do with the timing of the contact relative to the time that the ball goes through the hoop....which is the point being discussed even though it wasn't even what happened either.

I do not disagree the timing of the contact is really irrelevent. I think this should not be a call. I want a little more contact than that to have a foul honestly. If he did not want someone to jump over him, go further out from the basket. If the contact was lower on his body than maybe.

Peace