"Continuous" issues...

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Kelvin green

My thoughts, ball had been gathered on all 5 plays. They either were shooting or passing...

I nver saw a pass so they had to be shooting. We should stop making it so difficult.

Really? If they shoot sometime after they gather the ball and get fouled, they must have been shooting???? You must allow some serious continuous motion!!!!

How long after the foul must they get the shot off to be considered shooting?...1 second, 2 seconds, 10??? Hey, I just got fouled, if I throw the ball at the rim, they'll send me to the line!!!

It really isn't trying to be difficult. There must be some cutoff after the foul and before there is actually a shot where the opportunity for it to be a shot is gone.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

There must be some cutoff after the foul and before there is actually a shot where the opportunity for it to be a shot is gone.

I don't disagree with this but as I mentioned before in #3 A1 gathers, takes the bump and keeps going up with the try all in one fluid motion. That's why I asked those who might have called that play a non-shooting foul to add to their thoughts. I honestly wasn't sure what they were/are seeing on the play.

I think if the try is an afterthought it's going to be one of those Stevie Wonder situations (formerly Ray Charles, as we called them) where it's so obvious that anyone would see it wasn't continuous motion.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

I think if the try is an afterthought it's going to be one of those Stevie Wonder situations (formerly Ray Charles, as we called them) where it's so obvious that anyone would see it wasn't continuous motion.

Like someone throwing up a 40 foot shot near the end of the half/game when clearly they were not trying to shoot but threw up something to get the call or benefit of the doubt. This player was going right to the basket and I do not recall a teammate being around to pass it to. Players do not typically jump right around the basket to pass the ball.

Peace

[kk13]

I believe the saying goes something like this. If it looks like duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it must be a duck! Let the athletes be athletes and reward them for making a play!

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Really? If they shoot sometime after they gather the ball and get fouled, they must have been shooting???? You must allow some serious continuous motion!!!!

How long after the foul must they get the shot off to be considered shooting?...1 second, 2 seconds, 10??? ....

Since when did "getting the shot off" become a requirement to get awarded a shooting foul.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Kelvin green

My thoughts, ball had been gathered on all 5 plays. They either were shooting or passing...

I nver saw a pass so they had to be shooting. We should stop making it so difficult.

Gathering doesn't exist in NFHS. The rule is have they started their habitual shooting motion. During play 3, the foul happens and then the shooting motion begins. They offensive player did not start their shooting motion prior to the foul. In my opinion.

[APG]

I honestly don't see how anyone can have play 3 anything other than a shooting foul.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Gathering doesn't exist in NFHS. The rule is have they started their habitual shooting motion. During play 3, the foul happens and then the shooting motion begins. They offensive player did not start their shooting motion prior to the foul. In my opinion.

Fair enough. Now here's my question: What's the habitual shooting motion prior to taking a runner/floater in the lane?

[APG]

Would y'all consider this in the act of shooting? (For the record, I believe this is easily in the act):

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by APG

I honestly don't see how anyone can have play 3 anything other than a shooting foul.

I don't see why officials look for reasons to judge a foul as non-shooting. And it seems they always make a big production of it when selling the call. They have to sell the call so hard b/c they are trying to convince everyone.

As officials we need to pay attention to what's going on in the game. If it's the 4th quarter and the guy who has put up 25 shots already is going to the hole and gets bumped after gathering his dribble do we really think he was intending on passing the ball?

The "on the floor" officials treat the play as if it were the best call of the game.

[twocentsworth]

Originally Posted by APG

Would y'all consider this in the act of shooting? (For the record, I believe this is easily in the act):

Yes. This is a shooting foul at all levels: NBA, NCAA, NFHS.

[ballgame99]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Fair enough. Now here's my question: What's the habitual shooting motion prior to taking a runner/floater in the lane?

Exactly. If gathering the ball and starting your layup motion isn't part of the habitual shooting motion I don't know what is. "Habitual"=habit=what you always do; that is the motion that you do when you perform a layup/runner, therefore it is part of your habitual shooting motion.

The tough one is when the foul occurs on the rebound and the offensive rebounder takes the ball strait back up and scores. I've learned the hard way to have a patient whistle on that one. I hate having to reward the D by wipeing an easy bucket for the O and making them take it out of bounds. But I can't count the bucket and give them one because they weren't fouled on the shot.

[APG]

Originally Posted by twocentsworth

Yes. This is a shooting foul at all levels: NBA, NCAA, NFHS.

I agree...I guess it was more directed toward those that thought play 3 was close.

For the record, the officials in the clip didn't rule this in the act.

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by APG

I honestly don't see how anyone can have play 3 anything other than a shooting foul.

My thoughts exactly when reading through this thread. All 5 plays are not close IMO.

And play #3 is so clearly a shooting foul in my book that I'm shocked to see people sayings its even remotely close.

As for the talk of a patient whistle on #4 I think thats a misapplication of the philosophy. If you are going to be patient then don't penalize the offense by then deciding to put air in it once they are in their shooting motion.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I don't see why officials look for reasons to judge a foul as non-shooting. And it seems they always make a big production of it when selling the call. They have to sell the call so hard b/c they are trying to convince everyone.

As officials we need to pay attention to what's going on in the game. If it's the 4th quarter and the guy who has put up 25 shots already is going to the hole and gets bumped after gathering his dribble do we really think he was intending on passing the ball?

The "on the floor" officials treat the play as if it were the best call of the game.

+1

[fullor30]

Coach "he wasn't shooting"

He was attempting to but the foul prevented him

#3 I'd listen to an argument but she's in the act. In all cases a patient whistle would have had the correct call, especially 5. Calling official might be calling slight push, rather than see play through and make proper call.

When a player gathers a ball off a dribble where else are they going with it.

Great examples, thanks!