I have to agree. We have to know who is initiating contact. When the defender switches to guard the post player, the offense creates contact by backing the defense into the lane. The defense tries to resist and is able to hold their position. The defender then tries to re-position to the high side and the offense again displaces the defender up to the FT line. The defender then tries to establish position on the low side and is displaced again. The defender is forced to hold as a result of displacement in the last two situations.

On this play, know who is initiating contact.

The L needed to be on this side of the floor to see this play.

Uh, this post is kind of a cop out isn't it?

+1

How so?

I've already said that I have a hold on the defender. But as you know, this thing of ours is all about getting angles...I'm just acknowledging that given a different angle, I may just very well change my opinion. No different from when one sees a block/charge play where we get the center/slot's angle and it looks like a charge...yet get a better angle from the baseline and are able to pick up on late lateral movement from a defender making it a block.

Who is displacing who? The offense is continually pushing the defender where ever he wants to and early on has him wrapped up.

If the defensive player was pushing/displacing that offensive player like that it would be called a foul instantly by most. But for some reason the offensive player is basically displacing the defender all over the floor and nothing is called.

My opinion, get that hook and displacement by the offense early in the play.

Hold on the defender...but I' could buy a hold on the offensive player if I saw the play from another angle...as long as one doesn't cop out to calling a double foul.

You are right either way the discussion goes. Defense = "that is what I said", Offense = "I said I could buy that" I guess our videos are of different angles because the video I'm looking at clearly has the offensive player displacing the defender and then using his left arm to keep the defender from getting into a 3/4 post defense position. That is the first action that I see could be called a foul.

We don't really know what had happened in this game so far, but if that post player is a legit player on the block the Lead should get into a position to see that play. If I'm not mistaken this is a two-man game and the Trail is looking at the on-ball matchup right?

another +1

I have a question for those that would go with a defensive foul. If the post player received the ball - a pass to his right hand, as he is holding off the defender with his left hand, do you think that would be an advantage?

No, I think he's saying a cop out would be going with a double foul. He's not trying to be right, just saying there needs to be a whistle and the whistle should be for whatever action the Lead saw first instead letting the hand-fighting go on for 10 seconds.

I guess you just interpreted my post differently. This play has already been discussed in a Facebook group which had some members advocating a double foul. My cop out statement was more to say call the first illegal contact in one's judgement.

And FYI, if my assignor said straight up he had a hold on the defender, I wouldn't try to rationalize an answer choice. I'd own up to having a foul on the defender and be being wrong.

Geez guys reporting fouls . . . making a judgement call . . . just mail in the 3 second call and call it night ;)

I've acutally thinking this has to go on the offense he's using his hands/arms to establish and create space first. If your going to get the retaliation you've got to go double foul if not, then get the offense early.

OK, I must have understood you wrong. I don't understand the last part about your assignor.

Hey APG,

I called my first double foul of the year tonight. Sorry man. :D

And yes it was a cop out.

Peace

Cause it didn't make sense. :o

If my boss said he had a foul on the offensive player, I'd own up to the fact that I was wrong.